Tax breaks for vegetarians?

[BurtWorm]

Hmmm... How would they prove it? With receipts from whole foods stores? Interesting idea though.

:think:

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/peta-seeks-tax-breaks-for-vegetarians-2007-05-31.html

PETA seeks tax breaks for vegetarians
By Ilan Wurman
May 31, 2007
Citing the need to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals is calling on congressional leaders to give vegetarians a tax break.

In a letter sent Wednesday to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), PETA President Ingrid Newkirk stated, “egetarians are responsible for far fewer greenhouse-gas emissions and other kinds of environmental degradation than meat-eaters.”

The letter added that vegetarians should receive a tax break “just as people who purchase a hybrid vehicle enjoy a tax break.”

Asked how the government would certify that taxpayers are vegetarian, PETA spokesman Matt Prescott said, “I imagine that a system could be adopted whereby taxpayers could show receipts for food purchases and/or sign an affidavit attesting … that they are vegetarian. If Congress is seriously interested about rewarding people for reducing their carbon emissions, then it could develop a system to verify that people are vegetarian.”

Congressional leaders, however, have not shown any indication of pursuing such a tax break.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

1. Oh Now That Is TOO FUNNY!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Good luck on that one!

:rofl:

[BurtWorm]

8. How many red meat lovers would NOT check "vegetarian" on their 1040s?

:think:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

12. True LOL. But The Silliest Part's That They Actually Believe Their Idea Has Any Merit To Begin With!

[BurtWorm]

20. There is some merit in the idea of rewarding people for taking actions for the public good.

I question whether vegetarianism alone should be rewarded (and don't see how it can be at the individual level, anyway). They could give a break to farms that use organic methods to grow produce or raise animals. That way, people who choose to buy organic products wouldn't be punished in the purse (as well as in the tastebuds a little too often for my taste ;) ).

[Beaverhausen]

21. Right. Like the article says, hybrid drivers get a tax break, why not veggies?

[dave_p]

73. Why shouldn't it?

Any evidence to the contrary?

[MADem]

13. How are they gonna know? Do you send in a fecal sample with your tax return, to prove ya haven't

been chomping on a burger????

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

14. As If I Hadn't Found Peta To Be Ignorant Enough Already LOL You're Absolutely Right.

I just can't believe this story is actually real!

[kestrel91316]

2. Great idea in theory, but too susceptible to fraud, obviously.

Half the country would lie and claim to be vegetarian just to save a few bucks on their taxes.......

[nam78_two]

130. Yea-now if the government were to really step up regulations on

the meat industry rather than letting them do whatever the hell they feel like, that would be something that would make a huge difference. As Eric Schlosser pointed out in "Fast Food Nation", there is a reason those burgers only cost $1.00.

The standards for instance, of the space allotted for chickens in many Scandinavian countries is so different from what it is here. It is disgusting the way our factory farms treat these poor creatures. They are packed up into the barest minimum amount of space and so they can increase their production no.s, push down the price of the meat and therefore generate more profits.
It is such a vile system.

Happier animals= fewer profits and we all know thats the most important thing right :eyes:.

[BlooInBloo]

3. I didn't think my respect for movement vegetarians could drop any lower.

[nam78_two]

119. We are all heart-broken to hear that

:cry: :cry: :cry:

[mzteris]

4. hmmmmmm -

maybe they're on to something - -

maybe increase taxes on meat products and lower/eliminate tax on veggies/fruits/soy, eh?

[flvegan]

26. Buy Carnivore Carbon Credits today!!!

hee hee hee.

[Gormy Cuss]

30. ~

:rofl:

Although there is no practical way of implementing it, I think this bill is a great PR stunt to raise awareness on how dietary choices may influence environmental health.

[flvegan]

35. Ingrid does her job well.

The more they promote it, the more it gets talked about.

[petronius]

28. That's an idea that has broad applicability

Tax rates could be fuel efficient cars, energy efficient appliances, low-impact foods, etc. You wouldn't have to prove you were only a vegetarian, for instance, but the more your diet emphasized the tax free foods the more you would benefit.

Of course, this could work as either a carrot or a stick: tax breaks on the 'good' things or higher taxes on the 'bad' things...

[mzteris]

204. I think it could work as an incentive

for people to eat a healthier diet overall.

Even for meat-eaters - meat was never meant to be the "main course" - just a small amout in addition to the rest of the diet.

I like the idea about the other "lower tax rates" for 'good' items - like fuel/energy efficient items, etc.

[valerief]

5. VEGETARIAN REBATE: BECAUSE WE FART LESS.

:rofl:
Too funny!

[Beaverhausen]

7. Actually, soy sometimes has the opposite effect on me

depending on how it is prepared!

Was that TMI?

[nini]

10. LOL

I know what you mean :D

[valerief]

17. I read where soy lowers your metabolism, so I avoid it. nt

[flvegan]

25. That's untrue, and I'd like to see where that tidbit came from.

I've read where soy practically turns men into women because of estrogen. It's all be debunked over and over, but it doesn't change that it's out there.

[Critters2]

57. Umm, same here. Dietary enzymes are my friend.

Thank God for Bean-zyme

http://veganstore.com/vitamins-and-supplements/digestion-support/bean_dash_zyme-anti_dash_gas-supplement/Page_1/110.html

[Clark2008]

38. Noooo... you'd be farting MORE.

Vegetables cause one to have well more gas than meats.

I mean, think about it:

Beans, beans
The musical fruit.
The more you eat,
The more you toot!


You don't hear that said about burgers. :)

[pink-o]

132. Only if we use BEANO...

...my favourite foods are broccoli and every kind of bean humankind can grow in soil...good thing I spend so much time outdoors!

:bounce:


But seriously...


I've not (knowingly) eaten meat, poultry or fish for over 30 years, but even I'm not certain veggie is the best diet for everyone on Planet Earth.


What I would like to see is our health care costs go down if we have gym memberships, bicycles, and can prove we don't smoke cigarettes. That's controversial enough, I can't imagine PETA's crazy idea gaining any credibility with mainstream people.


And yes, I know cows contribute to greenhouse gasses, I know you can feed millions more with a botanical diet than with a carnivorous one, I know about all the anitbiotics and hormones in flesh, yeah, yeah yeah. I originated those arguments back in the 70s when I was a born-again vegetarian.

But I've learned a few things in the last 3 decades, and you don't tell people what to eat any more than you tell them who to worship.

[Critters2]

158. Beano isn't veg. nt

[pink-o]

214. Wow, for real?

...I'll be honest with you, I was just being glib--I've never taken Beano. I'm more afraid of gastro-intestinal "remedies" than I am of what happens naturally, so I don't usually mess with that part of my bod.

The other non-veg substances that true vegetarians need to watch out for are gelatin (made from cows' and horses' hooves) and renent in cheese, which is an aging ingredient from the lining of a cow's stomach. But like with everything else I believe in, my philosophy is that each individual should get all the info, then make his/her own decision. I still wear leather, and don't always eat cheese I bought at the health food store. Others are more strict.

[Critters2]

216. Yeah, it's got gelatin. Gelatin is evil. It's everywhere. nt

[Codeine]

174. Are you kidding?!

I'm a lean, mean, methane-makin' machine.

That's veganstink, baby.

[Madspirit]

217. Not True...n/t

[Sapere aude]

6. Can we please make being a vegetarian one of the DU politically correct positions we should all

support.

I think it ranks right up there with giving the finger to Hummer drivers. As a vegetarian, at least I would be politically correct part of the time.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

11. Oh God No. Why On Earth Should We?

You can choose to be one, but you ain't better than anyone else for it. Has nothing to do with political correctness, it just had to do with personal choice.

[Sapere aude]

15. because vegetarians are responsible for far fewer greenhouse-gas emissions

Isn't that a politically correct thing to do? I mean being responsible for less cow flatulence etc.?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

18. ROFLMAO!!!!! Oh Give Me A Break!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

You don't eat meat cause ya don't want to. But no vegetarian is on any higher ground than any non vegetarian. Sorry.

[BlooInBloo]

23. (shrug) Whatever. Just make them gods and be done with it. Maybe they'll shut up then.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

51. LOL

:rofl:

[yewberry]

147. Yeah, we should just shut up.

And when people insult us, we should either just take it quietly or leave, right?

[Cobalt Violet]

192. Their just jealous meatheads.

They have to cover up their feelings of inadequacy with snide remarks at others. That's how they sound to me. We must be a threat to them.

[Sapere aude]

29. Where did anyone say vegetarians were on higher ground? That is your comment.

It says they cause less greenhouse gasses to be emitted. It doesn't say vegetarians are superior human beings.

[flvegan]

32. It's

called spin with a side of strawman. SOME folks around here are famous for it.

What you're doing right now is like trying to call the IRS on April 15th. You'll never get through.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

39. Wonderful (and relaxing) line:

"What you're doing right now is like trying to call the IRS on April 15th. You'll never get through."

[Critters2]

89. True enough. I'm a glutton for punishment. nt

[Matariki]

43. there was a thread a week or so ago where someone argued that vegans were more evolved.

[flvegan]

45. Because one person stated it, that backs up that post?

That's kind of...reaching, don't you think?

[Matariki]

50. Oh, I've NEVER met any self righteous vegetarians or vegans. Never.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

55. My Post Was Fine.

The 'higher ground' meant higher ground as it relates to global warming. I say the argument is bullshit, and no vegetarian is of any higher standing in that realm than any non vegetarian, based solely on being a vegetarian. It is all sorts of silly to me.

[flvegan]

58. You alluded to "higher ground"

where none was suggested.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

63. Jesus, Did You Like Not Read My Reply At All? You Respond As If I Hadn't Already Explained.

Quite perplexing, your reply. :crazy:

[slackmaster]

46. They're about as "more evolved" as rabbits

Only vegans don't have to eat their food twice.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

54. !

:spray:

[BlooInBloo]

59. At a minimum, I trust it's been adequately demonstrated that meat-eaters are....

... a whole helluva lot *funnier* than our vegetative cousins.

[slackmaster]

61. Tell me about it - I have three cats and a dog

They're all extremely funny!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

65. LOL Wonder If There's Ever Been A Study On That.

:)

[slowry]

85. Hmm

How to compare this to redneck humor, without using the word "redneck"... oh fuck it :).

[Madspirit]

218. Radical Interpretation of the Text

I didn't say we were more evolved in relation to ANYTHING except the idiot comments about how we have primitive teeth and ergo that proves we are supposed to eat meat. I said..."evolve".. I hate the "primitive teeth" argument.

Quote me in CONTEXT please.
Lee

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

53. I Say They Don't Cause Less Greenhouse Gasses To Be Emitted.

In fact, I find the whole premise to be extremely misguided and silly.

[flvegan]

62. EVERYONE, QUICK...

Bow down before The Decider. There's probably reams of paper and gigabytes worth of data to back up "I say they don't"

Keep in mind that this is in relation to diet, just like hybrids are in relation to the average automobile.

So long as it's all about you.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

67. Gee flvegan, You Appear To Have Serious Issues When Someone Doesn't Fully Agree With You.

I mean, all nonsensically sarcastic and stuff. Doesn't really do much for your position ya know.

I mean seriously; I'm doing something wrong by saying I disagree completely with the ridiculous notion that you contribute less to greenhouse gases by being a vegan? Am I supposed to be required to walk lockstep with you in believing such unjustifiable garbage?

Well sorry pal, ain't gonna happen. I tend to not choose to believe in stuff that's like, ya know, not real. :hi:

[flvegan]

70. Spin like that

could knock the Earth off her axis. Please, be careful.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

71. You So Silly.

When you're ready to like actually defend why you think in a million years that your being vegan has somehow contributed less to global warming, be sure to get back to me. But as long as you're going to continue to reply with such nonsense, then see ya! :hi:

[flvegan]

Nonsense.

I like this debating style of yours. I remember it well from 4th grade.

Speaking of see ya, I have an Ignore list to update.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

107. I Love How You Can Never Defend Your Position. It Cracks Me Up.

Bye! :hi:

[slowry]

112. You Project A Lot n/t

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

127. I Have Defended My Positions, So Your Post Is Without Merit. The Other Poster Hasn't.

But nice try bub! :hi:

[slowry]

141. You never defend your position.

You're a hit and run poster who doesn't run. A troll. Woot, this is getting deleted (apologies to the mods, sigh?).

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

149. Actually, All I Do Is Defend.

It is trouble makers like you that respond with nothing but nonsensical personal attack, rather than actually engaging in discussion. So check yourself pal.

Maybe you'd have a leg to stand on if you actually defended your position, since I've already defended mine. How bout doin that instead of the childish name calling and taunting? :hi:

[slowry]

156. Here.

Oh Now That Is TOO FUNNY!

No reason given. Flame.

But The Silliest Part's That They Actually Believe Their Idea Has Any Merit To Begin With!

No reason given. Flame.

I just can't believe this story is actually real!

No reason given. Flame.

In response to someone suggesting vegans and vegetarians are responsible for less greenhouse gas emissions:

ROFLMAO!!!!! Oh Give Me A Break!

You don't eat meat cause ya don't want to. But no vegetarian is on any higher ground than any non vegetarian. Sorry.

No reason given. Flame.

In response to someone pointing out that vegans/vegetarians cut out the middleman of cows, chickens, etc.:

Here's A Newsflash For Ya: The Grain Would've Been Used Anyway, Whether I Ate The Meat Or Not.

I mean, do you REALLY think for a second that because you don't eat meat there have been less cows fed in the world?

Illogical. Flame. Yes, less cows have to bred and slaughtered, by definition. Whether it's 1 or 100, over someone's lifetime, it counts. As with any worthwhile response to global problems, it requires cooperation. Surely you can't deny that the less people eat meat, the less cows need to be fed ridiculous amount of food, to make us unHappy Meals.

This is like Bush arguing that there's no point doing anything about climate change, because China isn't. It doesn't add up.

The "position" you're defending is that veganism/vegetarianism is FUCKING RIDICULOUS because (no reason given).

Flame on.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

166. Way To Selectively Cut And Paste Pal.

Now how bout pasting the one where I did defend the position.

And guess what: Asking for tax breaks is absolutely ridiculous, and no, your being a vegan doesn't do a goddamn thing to reduce emissions. You want to believe it does so that you can feel good about yourself, but it ain't doin a damn thing.

If you think for a second that around the world some breeder had to breed one less cow because of you, you are fooling yourself. They would've bred and slaughtered the same amount of cows anyway. If anything, all you've done is caused one of the cows to not be needed as quickly, thereby allowing it to live longer and consume EVEN MORE because you didn't eat it LOL

[slowry]

170. Your logic is retarded.

By definition, the less people eating cows, the less are consumed.

Keep flaming, buddeh.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

178. Way To Rebut! Wow! You're So Masterful! Fact Is, You're Wrong.

You want to hold onto this ridiculous ideal that you are better than others somehow as it relates to global warming because you're a vegetarian. Well sorry, but that's just in your mind. It ain't real. It means nothing. And like I've said; just your being on the computer tonight has already probably offset anything you gained by not eatin that steak. So who are you foolin?

[slowry]

181. But I'd be on the computer either way... so your logic is silly again. n/t

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

182. My God Is It This Hard For You To See Every Point?

The whole point is that whatever you supposedly save by being a vegan is negligible at best, and just something as stupid as you being on the computer tonight is enough to offset it. Therefore, it is USELESS to claim you are helping global warming somehow. You ain't. You. Just. Simply. Ain't.

So like I said to begin with, and my whole goddamn point to begin with, is that vegetarianism is nothing more than just a goddamn diet by choice just as my diet is. You're no better for the world than me and I'm no better for it than you. You choose to eat what you want, I'll choose to eat what I want. Putting forth a premise that you are better for the world somehow because of your diet is just severely misguided and silly. That's my whole point to begin with. Be a vegan all you want! More power to ya! But please, enough with the silly ass claims.

[slowry]

187. Negligible.

Ok, 20 posts in and you've finally explained your position, and your flames. Gotta say it was a lot easier when you were just flaming.

Is my choice not to eat animal products going to save the world? Nope. Would it make a (massive) difference if it became the norm? You bet. Have I consumed a bottle of sake, and done a fairly respectable amount of coding in the time since this thread started? Yup.

If you think an individual choosing to do something which is immediately insignificant, but potentially very significant, when looking forward, is flame-worthy -- go nuts. You're rockin' the tubes man. But tell me: how insignificant must one feel, to be wallowing in the insignificance of others?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

195. Yes, Negligible.

And that's what people like you always try and fall back on; the whole "if EVERYONE did it it WOULD make a difference!" nonsensical argument.

Well hey, guess what, I live in the real world. In the real world you are making zero impact with this as it relates to global warming. That's a fact. That's why all it is is nothing more than a simple diet choice for you and a diet choice for me with no significant difference to the world between the two. Saying "bbbbut someday, if great enough numbers, blah blah blah" don't change a thing. Here. Now. This discussion. Reality. Ain't a goddamn difference to the world because you are choosing to be a vegan.

In fact, I'd wager that the research they're doing on reducing the methane issue will be far more capable of having an impact in a far less time from now then it will take for you to have enough vegetarians in numbers to have any impact whatsoever. That's reality. I like reality. I like to debate with the parameters of reality.

And I wasn't flaming ANYBODY for choosing to be vegetarian. More power to ya. I have tolerance for people's choices and can't find a thing wrong with being a vegetarian if one chooses. My flames were for the RIDICULOUS notion from peta that they should get a tax break for it. It is monumentally silly on its face and absolutely worthy of mockery. If you fail to see why then I can't help you.

[slowry]

205. Oh, as it relates to global warming?

You are correct :).

[flvegan]

115. If only

I made you laugh as much as you made me laugh.

I'd feel pretty good about it.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

128. You Kidding?

All I've been doing is laughing at you. At least I have a leg to stand on with my argument. You only laugh because you don't get it. I laugh cause I do...

[Critters2]

160. I have yet to see you make an argument. nt

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

168. Then Open Your Eyes.

You see what you want to see. Unfortunately, your perception is failing you.

[flvegan]

190. HEY EVERYBODY

Look at me!!!! I think I'm right again.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

196. Dude, Don't Ya Think It's Time To Let It Go? All You've Done Is Resort To

childish one liners while not defending your position at all. Are you going to continue doing so all night? Do you think you're proving something somehow? You have the gall to declare that I'm the one seeking attention? That's pretty funny dude.

Seriously. Time to let go now. Enough of the childishness ok?

Nite! :hi:

[flvegan]

161. Nope

You're a fucking joke, and the majority here know it, for whatever that's worth.

Sorry.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

173. Yet You're The One Doing The Personal Attacks While Not Providing Anything Of Substance. Funny That

And it always cracks me up how like the 1% overall of DU'ers who are persistent trouble makers without the ability to debate with intellect have the gall to think that they represent the majority of DU'ers with their opinions.

Dude, if ONLY you knew how much support I have here and how much respect I get for the way in which I hold my own and way in which I handle myself. I can't tell you how many well respected and sane posters here have thanked me or encouraged me to continue. Fact is though, it is only the 1% extremists or serial verbal attack spouters that make themselves so loud to appear larger in numbers than they are. That's why I don't mind. I don't expect to win the favor of all and I'd be a fool to think otherwise. I'm aware my blunt and masterful debate style rub some the wrong way and lord knows I could tone down my wiseassishness a bit at times. But do you actually think for a second that the 1% of you represent a majority of DU? Do you really? That's why I laugh my ass off. Cause you actually think I'm disliked by a majority here. Got news for ya pal; I get far more PM's of raving support from people then I get criticisms from you 1%, ok? So quit foolin yourself. :rofl:

[flvegan]

188. You judge

your relevance based on DUer PMs?

You make this too fucking easy.

But hey, your ego is healthy based on this:

Dude, if ONLY you knew how much support I have here and how much respect I get for the way in which I hold my own and way in which I handle myself. I can't tell you how many well respected and sane posters here have thanked me or encouraged me to continue. Fact is though, it is only the 1% extremists or serial verbal attack spouters that make themselves so loud to appear larger in numbers than they are. That's why I don't mind. I don't expect to win the favor of all and I'd be a fool to think otherwise. I'm aware my blunt and masterful debate style rub some the wrong way and lord knows I could tone down my wiseassishness a bit at times. But do you actually think for a second that the 1% of you represent a majority of DU? Do you really? That's why I laugh my ass off. Cause you actually think I'm disliked by a majority here. Got news for ya pal; I get far more PM's of raving support from people then I get criticisms from you 1%, ok? So quit foolin yourself.

I'm not down with a pissing contest, OMC. I also won't go into how much NON DU support I have. See, see how a pissing contest goes sour? Cuz in the real world, I get support that...nevermind. That response will only feed my ego.

Enjoy smoking your DU support. Cuz you ain't shit outside.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

193. You Assume Much.

You know my real life how now? Oh wait, that's right, you don't. So if anyone has a misguided ego it is you.

See, you were the one who chose to go down the whole 'DU support' path, not me bub. Now when I called out on it for being as foolish as you were in your empty and childish illegitimate and baseless attack, you attempt to throw it back on me as if it was something that I came up with. Well sorry pal, the fact is you have failed entirely to defend any point you've made in this thread and have been reduced to spewing unsubstantiated personal attack after personal attack. Not a good way to support your position I must say.

So since it has been a monumental waste of time going through yet another subthread with you in which you resort to this sort of game while failing to defend your position at all, I'll say goodnight now.

See ya! :hi:

[flvegan]

194. Hey, you stated it, OMC.

Sorry if it hurts when it's read back to you.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

197. Ummmm, Yes, I Stated It. Did I Say I Hadn't?

I noticed you yet again failed to defend anything in my post and it appears your primary purpose is to act childish and taunt me. Well I'm not giving in to your taunting any longer. If you choose to actually respond with something of substance or merit, I'll consider responding. If you are going to continue with this nonsense, then no thanks. I should've done that long ago in this thread.

[Critters2]

76. It is real. It takes 16 pounds of grain to produce one pound of beef

Growing all that grain requires fossil fuel--in fertilizers and pesticides, to run the farm equipment, to take the livestock to market, the slaughter process, etc. Not only is it true, it's obvious.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

78. Let Me Guess: A Leprechaun Just Magically Makes Vegan Food Appear On Their Plates, Right?

:rofl:

[Critters2]

82. You eat the meat that took all that grain to produce.

I eat grain. And a lot less of it than the cattle you eat. Thus, my diet uses fewer fossil fuels. This is really pretty clear, so I wouldn't expect you to get it.

[flvegan]

87. Hey, mc2

Check out post #32 (mine) above.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

121. Here's A Newsflash For Ya: The Grain Would've Been Used Anyway, Whether I Ate The Meat Or Not.

I mean, do you REALLY think for a second that because you don't eat meat there have been less cows fed in the world? Do you really think you've impacted demand to the point someone, somewhere, has slaughtered less cows because of your dietary choice? Do you really believe that for a second? And hey, even in spite of that, if because you didn't eat the cow that cow is now still alive, doesn't that mean it is alive longer and therefore requiring more grain and producing more flatulence because of you? Isn't that contrary to your assertion?

Your argument is amazingly misguided in my opinion.

And what about chicken? Don't most people eat chicken more than any other meat? What's the offset there? I eat maybe a pound of beef a month. You truly think that miniscule amount contributes to global warming somehow?

Hell, I'd wager that the energy you just used arguing with me on the computer is probably equal to whatever you saved by not eating a steak tonight!

Here's the deal: You can choose whatever diet you want and I can choose whatever diet I want. But in reality, at the end of the day, you're doing it cause it's what you want and I'm doing it cause it's what I want, and it ain't got a damn thing to do with global warming. Turning it into a premise like that is just all sorts of ridiculous to me.

And furthermore, I'm so fed up with all these people who think that each little niche thing they do that others don't, is enough for them to think they are helping the environment more somehow. It's so narrow minded. Know what it really comes down to? I don't care what you eat. I don't care what you drive. I don't care what lightbulbs ya got. All it comes down to is HOW MUCH DO YOU CONTRIBUTE PER YEAR. That's it. I don't care if it's from one thing or a sum of things. It just matters what your actual footprint is per year. So just being a vegetarian don't mean squat if you're still using your computer, since that all sorts of eats up resources.

Chances are, that I personally probably have a smaller output than half of those here who tout how good they are for the environment cause they do this, or do that, or blah blah blah blah blah, and I drive an SUV, eat meat and dry my clothes in a damn dryer. It's all about total output. But the fact is, many want to fool themselves into thinking they're doing more than they are by holding onto some niche thing they do that in the end of it all has almost no impact on anything. The vegetarian claim falls well into that. If I started a strictly vegan diet tomorrow, the world wouldn't even begin to feel any impact from any greenhouse gas savings. That's reality. Not happy feel good on paper but useless in reality sentiments.

[flvegan]

163. Well, then fuck the world. Thanks for the op-ed OMC.

Good work.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

167. No Problem. Glad To See You Were Unable To Refute It After All.

But keep on posting those empty one liners. They are doing so much for your position. :hi:

[flvegan]

186. I love a good

strawman.

From my experience here, it's all you have.

Pathetic.

No wave smilie from me, sorry.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

198. Second Time Now In This Thread You've Used The Word Strawman Incorrectly.

I encourage you to look it up prior to using it again.

And no, this post isn't a strawman either. :rofl:

[mudesi]

177. GET HELP

Seriously. You have issues.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

179. Yay! Another One Of My Fan Club Coming In With Only Personal Attack And Nonsense.

Stalk much lyny skyny? Go away.

[slackmaster]

44. Less COW flatulence perhaps

But they make up for it in human flatulence.

[flvegan]

49. Do they?

Got a study to back that up, or are you talking out of your ass?

Look...I made a funny.

[slackmaster]

60. Chill, I'm just blowing smoke

Out my ass, of course.

[gravity]

96. But we'll have more human flatulence

[burrowowl]

171. If the flatulence can be captured

it can be used as fuel or refrigerant.

[Raine]

104. I don't claim to be better

but I'm not worse either. What's wrong with showing a little sensitivity to your fellow brothers and sisters in DU when we agree on all but a few things. I just don't understand the lack of respect and cruel statements made because my dietary choice. :-(

[Raine]

101. I agree

I sure get sick of the crap that is dumped on vegetarians here. :mad:

[mikelewis]

206. I love meat so much that if it were legal... I'd probably eat humans...

...and yet I still support a Vegan for President... What you eat is not a political statement though who you ate could be... I suppose. Animals are food... you may feel bad about that if you wish but I guarantee you... if you're starving to death, you would eat a pork chop and still be politically viable. The DU politically correct platform is also a belief in evolution which puts humans at the top of the evolutionary food chain... we rule and cow makes us drool. If you were a creationist, I could see where your argument for vegetarianism attaining mainstream DU correctness may be viable but evolution teaches us we are animals... sentient animals but animals nonetheless. Since we are animals, humans eating other "lesser" animals is the design of nature and necessary for the survival of the species... any other argument smacks of creationism or some other loony anti-evolutionary conspiracy which would put you in with the crazies like William Jennings Bryant or Dr. David Ray Griffen. If we were to make vegetarianism acceptable, we would undermine our entire stance on Evolution... what we should do is form an exploratory committee to examine the facts on the impact that vegetable eaters would have on the party as a whole and in addition we could require a complete moratorium on all anti-vegetarianism activities we had secretly planned for this summer. {To clearify... the "we" was really just me and the "anti-vegetarianism activities" was mostly dark and silent brooding} However, in the unlikely event that vegetarianism is benign, we should be able to institute some level of "temporary correctness" with terms of complete correctness within 5 - 17 years or when U.S. forces leave Iraq... which ever is longer.

[gollygee]

9. I don't think there is any way that could be done

everyone would claim to be a vegetarian and then just buy whatever they wanted.

The only thing that could be done would be to tax meat and dairy, and then of course vegetarians wouldn't end up paying that. But I don't think it's a good idea to tax food - things are hard enough as it is these days.

[MADem]

16. Are they suggesting that because they don't eat COW, the cow farts don't accrue to them?

If they eat any milk products (and they DID say vegetarian, not vegan) that cow that gave that milk is farting away, each and every day.

Hell, when the cow is dead, it ain't farting--so the meat eaters might aver that they PREVENTED some cow farts from escaping, by consuming the offending cow...and then, there's all those BEANS--the musical fruit, after all, that are a strong protein substitute. Would a fart-o-meter be in order, perhaps??? :rofl:

PETA has really jumped the old shark with this foolish stunt. This is as dumb as it gets.

Of course, they're getting what they want--attention, and people talking about this half baked idea.

[Beaverhausen]

19. Plant-based food manufacturing creates much less CO2 emissions

than animal product manufacturing. This isn't about the emissions from the cows or the humans.

It is more ecologically prudent to eat a plant-based diet than to eat meat.

[flvegan]

22. Gawd but I do love Ingrid Newkirk.

No matter how laughable this may be on its face, no matter how unlikely and dismissable this is, the fact is that millions of people are going to read this little factoid about vegetarians and greenhouse gas emissions. It'll get forwarded by every pro-animal veg* person in a positive way, and it'll get the scoff/point-and-laugh treatment from the PETA haters, but it'll be forwarded around the globe, and people will take positive note of it.

Newkirk has admitted time and again that her job, PETA's job, is to promote awareness and discussion, regardless of how they look doing it. She does her job so fucking well, that PETA is a household name, love them or hate them.

Personally, 90% of the time, I love 'em.

*wrings hands* I can't wait for the "PETA kills dogs"/"PETA funds terrorism" morons to show up. Always a grand spectacle.

[Big Blue Marble]

37. That is exactly what I thought when I read the press release.

This is brilliant publicity. Rather than explain why a vegetarian diet makes a smaller carbon footprint than
a meat-based diet, an explanation that would hardly register with most, they take this approach which will get
more attention.

[flvegan]

47. Bingo. With the added plus of watching

the haters throw feces at everyone.

Like I said, they do their jobs well.

[slowry]

24. So sick of veg[etari]ans.

Baby-killing scum, imho.

le sarcasme caché

[mzteris]

27. um - excuse me?

:wtf:

[slowry]

34. hint: select hidden text

You know the story about the baby who was starved to death? "Vegan parents kill 6-week old baby" or some nonsense. Tragic, but there were like 8 threads over a few weeks, bashing vegans (I'm one btw) -- and someone went so far as to say all vegans are responsible for the child's death :eyes:.

[mzteris]

41. oh -

well - you might want to be a tad less subtle until we get to know you.

there is a :sarcasm: smilie....

Some people really believe that sh*t.

[Big Blue Marble]

31. Please explain your insult. NT

[flvegan]

33. You edited your post from something about another thread bashing vegetarians.

An odd choice for your end result, here.

[slowry]

36. yeah was feeling mega-snarky n/t

[SammyWinstonJack]

40. LOL! And the insanity continues!

:crazy:

[Matariki]

42. This is cute. PETA should stick to throwing red paint on old ladies.

[flvegan]

48. When

did PETA, the organization, throw "red paint on old ladies" exactly?

[Matariki]

52. Bejeezus it's well documented. Look it up. n/t

[flvegan]

56. If you say so.

Wonder why PETA, the organization hasn't been sued a couple thousand times for these "well documented" actions? Hmmm...how curious.

[Matariki]

66. Why hasn't PETA sued for defamation if it isn't true

I think it's an inconvenient fact for you. Why don't you prove that it's just slander of PETA if you're so certain.

I remember news photos of old rich women in fur coats coming out of the New York Opera getting paint thrown on them. Maybe PETA has stopped that tactic, I don't know or care, but it is certainly one of the things that's built up the obnoxious reputation they have.

[flvegan]

68. Maybe PETA never did it.

Maybe you just think that a non-profit did that as opposed to individual activists.

Why would PETA sue? I'm still not seeing where anyone has, at any time accused PETA, the organization of throwing paint on anyone.

You threw it out there, you prove it.

Oh, wait...you can't.

[Matariki]

72. Yeah well I'm waiting for you to prove it isn't true.

what makes you even say that? Have you ever read that it's nothing but slander or is it something you just want to believe?

[Critters2]

77. You can't prove a negative. Logic 101.

I see you have a problem with logic, though.

[Matariki]

80. In this case it is COMMONLY known that one of PETA's tactics has been to throw paint on people

And pies. If one of the common criticisms of them ISN'T true, surely you could prove that.

However what it is, is an inconvenient truth to your zealotry.

[Critters2]

86. Again, one cannot prove a negative.

Why am I wasting my breath?

[Critters2]

64. If it's well documented, you should be able to share

some of that documentation. I'm looking forward to it.

[Matariki]

69. Who are you, Karl Rove. Denying a fact you don't like doesn't mean it's not true

Google 'peta throwing paint' for yourself. I have better things to do. I think PETA are a bunch of asses. I don't need to prove it. If you care why don't you prove that their reputation of throwing paint on old ladies is nothing but slander?

I'm looking forward to that.

[Critters2]

74. You made the claim, so it's really your responsibility to back it up. nt

[Matariki]

75. Okay, here you go.

This is from google's news archive - there are pages of news articles of incidents of PETA members throwing paint and pies on people.

http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=peta+paint&btnG=Search+Archives&um=1&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

[Critters2]

79. Only one of these even comes close to supporting your claim

and in that case, two individuals were arrested, not PETA leadership, strongly implying that their action was not planned by PETA. The others are all innuendo. For instance, Mary K. Blige warns PETA not to throw paint, but doesn't say they have. And then there are the articles I'd have to pay to read. You'll be surprised to know I chose not to.

[Matariki]

84. there are PAGES of articles. you really have a problem with reality

I fully expected you to ignore whatever facts I pointed you towards which is why I didn't want to waste my time in the first place.

I'm done with this conversation with you unless you can back up YOUR nonsense.

[Critters2]

90. Again, can't prove a negative.

That's hard for you to comprehend, isn't it?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

91. Could you link the one that involves the old lady?

Thanks.

[Matariki]

94. Joan Rivers. Look it up.

It was a tactic peta used in the 90's. If you care, look it up.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

97. Joan Rivers? The active member of PETA?

Hmm.

[Critters2]

99. Boy, those PEA types ARE crazy!! Throwing paint on themselves!!

Hehehe.

[Matariki]

105. Yes

in 1997. i know she's a peta member now.

honestly, how old are you, don't you remember when this was one of peta's favorite publicity stunts?

http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=peta+red+paint+&btnG=Search+Archives&num=10&as_ldate=1988&as_hdate=1999

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_for_the_Ethical_Treatment_of_Animals#Anti-fur_campaigns

PETA members have themselves crossed the line between campaigning and direct action, particularly in their long-standing efforts to halt the fur industry,<36> which has involved disrupting fashion shows and throwing paint at fur coats.<37> In 1996, PETA activists famously threw a dead raccoon onto the table of Anna Wintour, the editor-in-chief of Vogue, who promotes the use of fur in fashion, while she was dining at the Four Seasons in New York, and left bloody paw prints and the words "Fur Hag" on the steps of her home. PETA supporters have also pied Wintour more than once,<38> and a member delivered a package of maggot-infested innards to her office in April 2000, explaining in a press release that "Anna stole this animal’s skin and his life, she might as well have his guts."<39>

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

108. You know...

I can't prove it or anything, but it looks to me like you got suckered for a publicity stunt.

[Matariki]

110. whatever

and conveniently ignoring everything else in the post.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

113. Sure, they disrupt fashion shows...

(big whup)

and they throw red paint on fur coats (apparently their own).

So what?

[yewberry]

111. And it looks like most of the posters in this thread have, too.

If there is anything that PeTA is very good at, it's getting people talking without spending a lot on PR. It's a little amazing that more people don't notice that that's what they're doing.

[flvegan]

117. It's called "getting played"

I like watching folks twist over it too.

I've got several friends that work for PETA, and we have some good laughs at situations like this (this thread).

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

118. Yeah, but who's getting played?

Sounds to me like PETA's trying to be a player, and ending up playing themselves.

[flvegan]

157. No, they are doing their job.

[Matariki]

125. I figured you had a vested interest in lying about their past actions.

[flvegan]

159. And so, the strawman makes it about me

With nothing to offer, nothing to add, having their ass handed to them time and again, this is the best they offer.

Nice. You should look up what "vested" actually means, mark.

[Matariki]

184. Do you even know what the word strawman means?

Apart from a term tossed about when you can't back up your argument?

You assert that PETA or PETA activists have never thrown paint on anyone, contrary to one of the most common criticisms of them. You can't back that up, but now I see why you want to pretend as if it never happened.

If you have any association with PETA you're right to be ashamed of some of their actions, but denial isn't going to change the facts.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

185. Obviously Not.

[flvegan]

191. Another nonsensical meaningless post by OMC. Can I get applause?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

199. Actually, It Wasn't Nonsensical At All. It Was Agreeing With The Poster That You Don't Know The

definition of a 'strawman'. Based on this and the second time you've used it above, we appear to be correct.

And seriously, can you just stop the taunting? It's beyond ridiculous already.

[flvegan]

189. And you haven't backed up shit.

Typical. Have you? Have you backed up a fucking thing? No.

Enjoy knowing that.

mark

[Matariki]

200. I posted at least twice with links pal - how have you backed up your bullshit?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

201. I Have Several Times. But Please Stop Projecting. It Is You That Has Yet To Rebut Anything.

Seriously, your taunts are getting tiresome. No more responses for you unless you actually are going to act like an adult and discuss some context. Bye now.

[Matariki]

122. sigh.

http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/columns/intelligencer/n_9623/

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

123. Exactly my point.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

81. Decreased greenhouse-gas emmission?

Nope. Cows are carbon neutral.

[Critters2]

88. 16 pounds of grain=one pound of beef

It takes much more fuel to produce meat than a plant-based diet.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

92. Where do you think the grain comes from?

[Critters2]

93. See, I eat only grains and other plants.

I don't pass them through a cow first. When I eat a pound of grain--it's just a pound of grain. When you eat a pound of beef, it's 16 pounds of grain. With all the fertilizers and pesticides, all the transportation fuels, all the energy used at the slaughterhouse, and all the fuel to run the planter, sprayers and combines.

I'm munching on rolled oats as we speak. Just oats, harvested, packaged shipped. Much less fuel used.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

95. Yeah, and then we both release greenhouse gases.

Which then gets reabsorbed by wheat plants.

It's all carbon neutral.

[Critters2]

98. It's the use of fossil fuels in agriculture that's the problem.

But I've tried to explain this to you, and apparently it's quite difficult for you to grasp.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

100. So then why not tax breaks for people without cars?

If it's really just a fossil fuel issue, and not a meat/veggie issue.

[Critters2]

102. Why not both? That'd be okay with me.

Even Al Gore acknowledges that a plant-based diet is better in terms of global warming. Or is he a PETA nut too?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

103. Nope Al Gore isn't a PETA member, and he eats meat.

What about a grass fed steer that never leaves the farm, except to the butcher shop? Isn't that steer using less fossil than your wheat?

[dave_p]

No they're not

Cattle need feed (which they convert poorly into human food). Feed needs land, and it's conversion of land to feed production that releases carbon. Cows contribute to global warming.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

109. Where do you think feed comes from?

[dave_p]

137. Largely from deforested land

The FAO estimates CO2 emissions from livestock-induced deforestation at 2.4 billion tonnes. Cattle are a big part of that, probably the biggest.

They're not neutral.

[and-justice-for-all]

83. I agree with the concept of this proposal..

But how in the hell would a vegetarian, such as myself, PROVE that I was actually a vegetarian? People that were not would surely abuse the Tax-Break..

[A-Schwarzenegger]

106. Please stop picking on meat eaters.

They're the last majority that it's OK to pick on.
Now you're going to make them pick up even
more of the tax burden?
If people were supposed to be vegetarians,
there would be vegetarians in animal nature,
but except for amebas or something that
do not have anybody smaller than them to eat,
if they even have mouthes, there is none.
You can take your higher vegetarian consciousness
and tax breaks, but please just leave meat eaters alone
because you are messing around with the wrong guy baby
when you try to rip the meat out of our mouthes because
of some doubious statistcs about such and such
in some greenhouse somewhere. Cease! Meat eater, unite!

[slowry]

116. Gorillas. Though they do eat a few insects here and there (B12 and such).

Peace.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

124. Has anybody given a gorilla a big fat rare porterhouse?

Let me guess: No. Why? To perpeturate the vegetarian myth.
I doubt that they are vegetarian. If you said
kangaroo or something, maybe. Did you watch all the gorillas
all the time to see what they ate or not? Let me guess: No.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

126. They're obviously not vegetarian.

Like whoever said, they eat insects. They're omnivores.

:shrug:

[A-Schwarzenegger]

129. Exactly. Is an insect a vegetable?

Not lately. Ipso facto.

[slowry]

136. The point is they don't eat animals.

And even if they did, think of how many different animals we disrupt. Land, sea, air, we're coming for ya. If we discover life in space, we'll fucking eat it, I swear.

If humans can get along just fine with the odd glass of milk or B12 supplement, and not breed and slaughter millions of animals, isn't that a worthy goal, for a modern society? Factor in the reduced harm to the environment (yes, I understand that veganism doesn't completely eliminate harm) and I can't understand why many folks here enjoy bashing it so.

Incidentally, there are countless examples, besides gorillas, of living creatures which manage without wreaking havoc on every creature with less that 6 legs, so the comparison someone made above to "amoebas" is ridiculous.

[nam78_two]

139. I applaud your patience

Don't damage your head too much with beating against that brick wall ok ;). But it is worth it for the lurkers.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

140. It is not a brick wall, it is a meat wall.

Meat makes the brain and skull stronger to resist dangerous vegetarian debate tricks.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

142. Amebas have a lot less than 6 legs the last time I checked.

Let's stick to the point and not try your tricky vegetarian
debate tricks. If you take money out of my meat eating pocket
to fill up the gap left by vegetarian taxes that are gone,
that will make me even more upset than I am now. You don't know
what you're doing with when you reach in my pocket and try
to (a) take my meat and (b) take my money. I don't like to even
hear about vegetarian, vegetarianism, vegan, vegetables, or
even vegematic, because I start getting sweaty and anxoius and
feel like my face twitches and a primaeval force takes over in
my meat eating vascireal. That's all I'm saying.

[slowry]

144. lol my bad n/t

[Robeson]

162. Slowry, I've just added you to my favorites list.....

...:hi:

[A-Schwarzenegger]

164. He started out "sick of vegetarians" in this thread ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1022728&mesg_id=1022880

but my meat arguments have turned him into a full-fledge vegetarian. So there.

[slowry]

172. rofl n/t

[slowry]

175. cheers mate n/t

[piedmont]

154. Huh? You think there aren't herbivorous animals?

"If people were supposed to be vegetarians,
there would be vegetarians in animal nature,
but except for amebas or something that
do not have anybody smaller than them to eat,
if they even have mouthes, there is none."

?????
:shrug:

[A-Schwarzenegger]

155. Probably only because nature left the meat-eating gene out of them.

That's not my fault. Humans have the meat-eating gene.
Vegetarians probably lack it. I know I have it because
if I don't eat meat several times a day I start to get
nervous, twitchy, sweaty, jumpy, irittable, scarcth myself,
nausea, sad, growl, give off a scent like rotten glands,
etc. I don't like things that make me think anybody will
try to take my meat away or make me feel bad or unconscience
for needing it. That's all I'm saying.

[nam78_two]

114. Yay -another gratuitous vegetarian-bashing thread on DU

I swear some days I feel like I could just as well go to Free Republic and be done with it :eyes:. This place sure isn't what it used to be.

[yewberry]

131. There's a reason

that so many veg*n DUers have moved onto greener pastures.

This stuff gets old--I'm pretty tired of being called names and stuff, too, but don't let it muck up your day.

[nam78_two]

135. I don't think the sentiment is necessarily ubiquitous

There is just a very vocal minority that shows up in threads like this and who strangely show up with right-leaning positions very often. I swear some days as a sort of retaliation I feel like signing up on Free Republic and going about capitalizing every single thing I say and saying things like lololololololololol *rofl* *rofl* and never saying anything intelligent but generally being a thorough pain in the ass. The only thing is -it would be hard to be denser than the Freepers, since the basic principle here is to avoid any sort of discourse with people with opposing views but just to be as obnoxious as possible. But like I said, it is hard to dumb down the debate any further when you are dealing with creationists and so on.

What is funny is that I am a scientist, I deal with scientists every day of my life and most of them sure as hell wouldn't have respect for the kind of thinking spouted by some of these self-proclaimed sensible DUers here laughing their socks off about those dumb ol' vegetarians. Yes, they would disagree with some of the stuff PETA says (well ok to be honest most of the claims about it being more natural for humans to be vegetarian etc.), but they sure as hell would disagree a lot more with some of the dum-dums upthread. And while I am a biophysicist and not a biologist, I have yet to meet a biologist who would argue that vegetarianism isn't a hell of a lot more eco-friendly than eating factory-farmed meat.

[Duppers]

212. I so agree. I wish there were an alert button for stupidity!

A couple of insult "comics" here should do a little research. Their biased opinions are not informed in the least.

:rofl: <---------- :sarcasm:

[Cha]

120. Worth a shot...how about vegans?

that's even less gas emissions and I don't have car, either.

[dave_p]

138. Vegans are better still

... but veggies are better than the alternative

[Cha]

150. You're so nice..I thought I was

gonna get snarked!

[Coexist]

133. Gee thanks, Burtworm

I don't get insulted enough on DU - being a vegetarian - thanks for another thread where non-vegetarians band together to self-importantly insist that vegetarians are self-important.

DU didn't suck enough with all the Cindy-bashing threads.

Thanks loads!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

134. I Don't Think Vegetarians Are Self Important At All.

Just the ones that put that concept forth. But that on a per individual basis. Most vegetarians I know are no more self-important than anyone else.

And furthermore, in the context of this thread, it was peta who put themselves forth as self-important by actually lobbying congress to pass legislation giving them a tax break; which is monumentally silly in my opinion. So it is them and those who agree that they deserve it for being vegans of which I am debating the merits of self-importance with, not vegetarianism itself.

[Coexist]

143. Thanks (I think?)

I wasn't calling you out - I was telling Burtworm he knew what he was starting (with a sad smile).

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

151. I Know :o)

But I do like to clarify sometimes cause I want to make sure I'm not being misunderstood.

[BurtWorm]

208. I did not know what I was starting.

Shame on you for suspecting that.

[Coexist]

210. really?!

did you forget the sarcasm smiley?

Every veg thread - no matter WHAT the OP, turns into a flame-fest.

[BurtWorm]

213. I don't usually participate in those.

But I suppose, based on other lifestyle choice threads I have participated in on DU, I should have known better. Nothing brings out the mean in a DUer like a good fight over lifestyle choice. :eyes:

[BurtWorm]

207. I didn't expect this! Honest to gods!

All day long I'm posting about Iraq, I get two or three replies. I post about vegetarianism, come back after a nice meatless meal and, BOOM!, 200+ replies. It's what the people want, I guess.

:wtf:

[Coexist]

219. I know how you feel - I post (what I think) are really great articles

samples:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1024729&mesg_id=1024729

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1024624&mesg_id=1024624

and I post 5 words about Olbermann's ratings and I get about 50 recs! You just never know what people are into that day.

Peace.

[Feron]

145. What a stupid idea..

,but then again PETA is all about publicity and little on substance. Personally, I think they do the AR movement a huge disservice. Sure people may talk, but PETA's idiocy more often than not drives people away. Mention PETA and wait for the eyeroll.

Demanding more fuel efficient engines and promoting alternative energies would have a far bigger impact than if the populace went veg especially considering how produce is transported cross country and flown in from all over the world. And there also is the energy expended from the manufacture of the faux dogs and other processed veggie fare.

I suppose if I wanted to take the "One True Scotsman" fallacy to it's logical conclusion: You can't be a true enviromentalist unless you grow your own food at home.

But hey, at least they aren't promoting the fallacy that world hunger would end if the world stopped eating meat. People who believe that are awfully naive.

Personally I went veg for three months and it's not for me right now. Maybe I'll try again in the future. I don't have a problem with veggies unless they are the zealots who love to remind you about how their diet is superior to yours.

[dave_p]

146. Livestock farming worse than transport - FAO

The FAO estimates that livestock farming causes 18% of greenhouse gas emissions, more than transport's share.

It accounts for nine percent of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions, most of it due to expansion of pastures and arable land for feed crops. It generates even bigger shares of emissions of other gases with greater potential to warm the atmosphere: as much as 37 percent of anthropogenic methane, mostly from enteric fermentation by ruminants, and 65 percent of anthropogenic nitrous oxide, mostly from manure.

Livestock production also impacts heavily the world's water supply, accounting for more than 8 percent of global human water use, mainly for the irrigation of feed crops. Evidence suggests it is the largest sectoral source of water pollutants, principally animal wastes, antibiotics, hormones, chemicals from tanneries, fertilizers and pesticides used for feed crops, and sediments from eroded pastures.

The full report says:

The livestock sector is by far the single largest anthropogenic user of land. The total area occupied by grazing is equivalent to 26 percent of the ice-free terrestrial surface of the planet. In addition, the total area dedicated to feedcrop production amounts to 33 percent of total arable land. In all, livestock production accounts for 70 percent of all agricultural land and 30 percent of the land surface of the planet.

And that’s before the doubling of livestock production expected by 2050. Still want to claim it doesn’t have an impact?

[NoPasaran]

148. The reduction in greenhouse gases is counterbalanced by elevated levels of smug

Apologies to non-PETA vegetarians.

[Cha]

153. Yeah, there's all kinds of

Vedge Heads..I do it for my health and I have this thing about.."To each his(her) own and to thine own self be true." B-)

[Ilsa]

152. And what about households with one veg and two carni's? nt

[NotGivingUp]

165. give me a fricking break. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

169. Great. Another fucking PETA thread.

Woo-hoo! PETA! Yippeee! :eyes:

Well, I guess every minute they waste on this kind of imbecilic bullshit is time they're not comparing my relatives who died in concentration camps to chickens at KFC.

[Critters2]

176. It was Isaac Bashevis Singer who did that.

PETA just quoted him.

[Warren DeMontague]

180. Yeah. And then ran an "Consciousness raising" campaign based on it.

Sorry. I don't care where it originated. Saying "A Holocaust Survivor said it first" doesn't convey some blanket veneer of immunity for the offensive fucking central idea there, namely that Jews=Chickens or Chickens=Jews.

It's still not legitimate, it's fucking offensive.

But, if one really believes that someone who eats a chicken is on the same identical moral plane as Jeffrey Dahmer, I'd suspect one is never going to grasp that.

[Critters2]

183. You don't think that for factory farmed animals

life is an "eternal Treblinka"? You should visit a factory farm.

[Warren DeMontague]

202. I think that drawing that moral equivalence is not only absurd, it's offensive.

For the record, I'm against factory farming, I think it's bad for everything and everyone. Hell, I don't even eat that much meat, and what I do eat is free range, sustainable, and as organic as possible.

But that's not PETA's agenda; PETA takes the stance that the killing of a chicken is morally equivalent to the killing of a human being. Leaving aside whether or not conditions in factory farms suck, for factory farmed chickens to be in an "eternal Treblinka" you have to accept the notion that Chickens are people, and people are chickens.

Certainly, some do take that position; but then let's not play the other PETA game of soft-pedaling the true agenda... because if a chicken is a person, and the killing of a chicken for food is a moral outrage, then it's a moral outrage whether or not it's done in a KFC factory situation or on a free range poultry farm.

[Critters2]

215. Again, PETA didn't say it. A well-known rabbi did.

PETA just quoted him. Your argument is with Isaac Bashevis Singer. But don't let the truth get in the way of your ranting.

[Warren DeMontague]

220. Again, Peta based an entire campaign on the premise. And if it's so valid, I don't know why they

would run away from it. If they had nothing to apologize for, then---

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/HolNa_52/4235_52.htm

why did they apologize?

Here's a question, since you don't seem interested in addressing any of the points I've raised so far: Do you think it's offensive when anti-choice groups compare the situation in the U.S. post Roe to the Holocaust? Do you think it's a misuse of the term? Do you see any problem with equating the murder of 6 million Jews with the "murder" of millions of first trimester fetuses, or of embryos or fertilized eggs in IVF clinics or (as many pro-life groups allege) through the use of the birth control pill?

Do you see a problem with that at all?

Because here, I'll spell out the problem: The anti-choicers declare, by fiat, that it is an absolute truth that the second after conception, a fertilized egg becomes a "baby" with "rights". Never mind that many- most- people do not accept that moral equivalence, and that most people believe that there is a gradual continuum between sperm & egg, zygote, embryo, fetus and baby, and that to grant "rights" to something like a fertilized egg (or an unfertilized egg or a sperm, for that matter) is not only ludicrous, it cheapens the very real concept of rights for actual, born human beings.

Despite their popularity in certain allegedly "liberal" circles, PETA absolutists actually have an awful lot in common with the hard-core anti-choice crowd. Like the anti-choicers, they want to declare by absolute fiat that all animals are, essentially, "people"- that there is no difference between a rat and a chicken and a dog and a dolphin and a human. Your toddler has some horrible disease and those pesky, amoral scientists want to test a new drug that could save her on rabbits or rats first? Tough shit--- What about the rights of the rats and rabbits?

Now, most people-- in addition to some unapologetic anthrocentrism that (and healthily, I think) says in the above situation "fuck the rat, my kid is more important"--- accept that, like with sperms, eggs, fetuses and babies, there is a continuum of sentience and consciousness that runs up and down the animal kingdom. And most people don't think that eating chicken, for instance, makes one a mass murdering psychopath. Likewise, most people think that animals should be treated as well as possible in the process of being raised for food and whatnot; which is why, if PETA's campaigns were just about factory farming, I wouldn't have a problem with 'em. But they're not. What they are about, again borrowing a page from the Operation Rescue crowd, is trying to equate chickens with people.

I have yet to see one hard core PETA person come out and say "Yes, we support free range poultry farming".

[DemGa]

203. It's an information campaign, and it's working

Great job PETA!!

:hi:

[Matariki]

209. How exactly is it working?

Diet for a Small Planet did a better job. Peta makes me want to go out and eat a steak, just out of sheer annoyance.

[LeftyMom]

211. I made $50 on all the popcorn I ate reading this thread.

:popcorn: