Shaming non-vegans is not right.

[Buck Edwards]

I'm sick of vegans shaming non-vegans. I don't have to feel bad when I enjoy my bowl of chicken. This is just going too far and utter nonsense. 

 

[sholomar]

David Hawkins warned about the spiritual ego but it seems like a lot of people into spiritual self help have large ones and rather than focusing on radical acceptance, they'd rather turn into political activists. Just my two cents. I'm not without problems myself, working on them for sure. None of these gurus wanted people to see all the evil in the world and be negative and nihilistic. 

Edited Tuesday at 04:35 AM by sholomar

[Buck Edwards]

1 minute ago, sholomar said:

David Hawkins warned about the spiritual ego but it seems like a lot of people into spiritual self help have large ones and rather than focusing on radical acceptance, they'd rather turn into political activists. Just my two cents. I'm not without problems myself, working on them for sure. 

 👍

Edited Tuesday at 04:35 AM by Buck Edwards

[SwiftQuill]

I became vegetarian in 2023. I lasted 9 months with that diet until I developed somewhat serious and worrying health issues (fainting sensation, weakness, less strength when lifting weights).

What those morons don't understand is that resistance in changing our diet isn't just about "me likes eat meat". It affects your health, your lifestyle, your social life (can't eat in restaurants with friends and family), your time (preparing vegan food can longer).

It is an admirable goal to reduce animal suffering. But don't get preachy about it.

Edited Tuesday at 07:56 AM by SwiftQuill

[Buck Edwards]

4 minutes ago, SwiftQuill said:

I became vegetarian in 2023. I lasted 9 months with that diet until I developed somewhat serious and worrying health issues (fainting sensation, weakness, less strength when lifting weights).

What those morons don't understand is that resistance in changing our diet isn't just about "me likes eat meat". It affects your health, your lifestyle, your social life (can't eat in resttwith friends and family), your time (preparing vegan food can longer).

It is an admirable goal to reduce animal suffering. But don't get preachy about it.

+1

Thanks for sharing your account. 

Edited Tuesday at 08:00 AM by Buck Edwards

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

Notice how he thinks of animals as children. Typical vegan. That's so sad. Animals do look cute but you should have your own children to protect

[Alex4]

I eat a lot of meat, but I hate it and find it tiresome when I hear the typical jokes about vegans. They are not hurting anyone

Edited Tuesday at 10:52 AM by Alex4

[Basman]

It makes them look like a cult and not a serious diet. And its the only diet that is like this. You don't see paleo folk giving a shit what you eat.

And it just stupid. At a certain point, these Stage Green oafs need to accept that people are just going to think differently on certain issues. Unless of course its kind of a cult thing its more about signaling to other members.

I won't say veganism as a whole is stupid, it has highlighted the importance of animal welfare in their exploitation, but the end goal of completely ending all animal exploitation is extreme and impossible. If it where up to someone like Peter Singer, nature would be turned into a daycare center and predators would be euthanized via contraceptives.

[Princess Arabia]

He's probably stepping on an ant right there while filming that video. Poor ant screaming for HELP!!!

[Scholar]

17 hours ago, Buck Edwards said:

I'm sick of vegans shaming non-vegans. I don't have to feel bad when I enjoy my bowl of chicken. This is just going too far and utter nonsense. 

 

Sure, shaming is not the best tactic, but every shaming vegan is better than a non-shaming non-vegan. Both in regards to their development as humans, as well as their basic moral character.

Edited Tuesday at 09:36 PM by Scholar

[Scholar]

9 hours ago, Basman said:

It makes them look like a cult and not a serious diet. And its the only diet that is like this. You don't see paleo folk giving a shit what you eat.

And it just stupid. At a certain point, these Stage Green oafs need to accept that people are just going to think differently on certain issues. Unless of course its kind of a cult thing its more about signaling to other members.

I won't say veganism as a whole is stupid, it has highlighted the importance of animal welfare in their exploitation, but the end goal of completely ending all animal exploitation is extreme and impossible. If it where up to someone like Peter Singer, nature would be turned into a daycare center and predators would be euthanized via contraceptives.

Because veganism is not a diet, it's an ethical stance. Diet is simply one part of remaining consistent in regards to human rights and basic ethical foundations that we as a society subscribe to.

 

What you say is as profoundly ignorant as maintaining a stance that because ethics is subjective, therefore whether or not you want to be racist is a matter of opinion and anyone who tries to speak against human rights violations is a radical because these stage orange oafs need to accept that not everyone is going to agree on what basic human rights even are.

 

The truth is, you are not developed enough ethically speaking to even be capable of understanding the vegan position. Moral consideration for me but not for thee.

Edited Tuesday at 09:34 PM by Scholar

[Basman]

26 minutes ago, Scholar said:

Because veganism is not a diet, it's an ethical stance. Diet is simply one part of remaining consistent in regards to human rights and basic ethical foundations that we as a society subscribe to.

 

What you say is as profoundly ignorant as maintaining a stance that because ethics is subjective, therefore whether or not you want to be racist is a matter of opinion and anyone who tries to speak against human rights violations is a radical because these stage orange oafs need to accept that not everyone is going to agree on what basic human rights even are.

 

The truth is, you are not developed enough ethically speaking to even be capable of understanding the vegan position. Moral consideration for me but not for thee.

But ethics is a matter of perspective. Ascribing altruism to animals isn't something everybody is going to agree on to the same extent that vegans tend to do. That doesn't mean your necessarily less developed or that you don't value animal welfare.

The problem with veganism, or at least the more extreme version of P. Singer, is that it prioritizes individuals over systems. If you start giving every animal rights you start undermining human society as well as natural ecosystems. That is when you get people who release fur minks into the wild, which then devastate the ecosystem driving native bird species to extinction.

Veganism is like communism in that its more about the critique than the means in my opinion. Just like how its not truly possible for there to be a true communist state outside of perhaps a hunter-gatherer tribe its not possible for everyone to be vegan.

[Scholar]

10 minutes ago, Basman said:

But ethics is a matter of perspective. Ascribing altruism to animals isn't something everybody is going to agree on to the same extent that vegans tend to do. That doesn't mean your necessarily less developed or that you don't value animal welfare.

The problem with veganism, or at least the more extreme version of P. Singer, is that it prioritizes individuals over systems. If you start giving every animal rights you start undermining human society as well as natural ecosystems. That is when you get people who release fur minks into the wild, which then devastate the ecosystem driving native bird species to extinction.

Veganism is like communism in that its more about the critique than the means in my opinion. Just like how its not truly possible for there to be a true communist state outside of perhaps a hunter-gatherer tribe its not possible for everyone to be vegan.

The problem is that, ethics being a matter of persective undermines your entire point. Of course to the racist, the abolitionist will be annoying and "psychologicall unwell", and radical and unhealthy. But why would the abolitionist care about this? He thinks slavery is immoral, so of course he will be willing to kill you.

What you are missing is that moral relativism the way you employ does nothing but serve the status quo. You basically demand of individuals to maintain the status quo, to not get on your nerves, because morality is relative and therefore everyone should be left to do what they please. But this only works because you are not the one who is victimized. It's a profoundly ignorant state of consciousness you reside in. You are utterly blind to your own evil.

 

In the end you just find it extreme because it doesn't fit your self-serving value system. Malcom X was also extreme, and what you are doing by appealling to some utilitarian Philosopher, is basically appealling to Malcom X to dismiss the abolitionist (or equal rights) movement, because he is radical and extreme.

You can disagree with the vegans, but in the end the light of consciousness will win over the darkness. Your archaic worldview will perish, and everyone will see how blatantly biggotted and selfish you were.

And I don't even mean this in a profoundly condemnatory way, it simply is what it is. It's like people who argued abolishing slavery will come with all the former slaves dying of starvation and disease because they will no longer have employment. This exactly transpired, but that does not change the fact that the racist slave-owners simply appealled to that fact, not because they cared about slaves, but because they would appeal to anything that would make the other side seem unreasonable.

 

Veganism is like human rights and the abolition of slavery. But you are missing a far deeper point, in that the moral relativism you subscribe to give every radical vegan a perfect validation of their actions. They could engage in terrorism and be perfectly morally justified, because morality is simply a matter of perspective.

Edited Tuesday at 10:14 PM by Scholar

[Basman]

33 minutes ago, Scholar said:

The problem is that, ethics being a matter of persective undermines your entire point. Of course to the racist, the abolitionist will be annoying and "psychologicall unwell", and radical and unhealthy. But why would the abolitionist care about this? He thinks slavery is immoral, so of course he will be willing to kill you.

What you are missing is that moral relativism the way you employ does nothing but serve the status quo. You basically demand of individuals to maintain the status quo, to not get on your nerves, because morality is relative and therefore everyone should be left to do what they please. But this only works because you are not the one who is victimized. It's a profoundly ignorant state of consciousness you reside in. You are utterly blind to your own evil.

 

In the end you just find it extreme because it doesn't fit your self-serving value system. Malcom X was also extreme, and what you are doing by appealling to some utilitarian Philosopher, is basically appealling to Malcom X to dismiss the abolitionist (or equal rights) movement, because he is radical and extreme.

You can disagree with the vegans, but in the end the light of consciousness will win over the darkness. Your archaic worldview will perish, and everyone will see how blatantly biggotted and selfish you were.

And I don't even mean this in a profoundly condemnatory way, it simply is what it is. It's like people who argued abolishing slavery will come with all the former slaves dying of starvation and disease because they will no longer have employment. This exactly transpired, but that does not change the fact that the racist slave-owners simply appealled to that fact, not because they cared about slaves, but because they would appeal to anything that would make the other side seem unreasonable.

 

Veganism is like human rights and the abolition of slavery. But you are missing a far deeper point, in that the moral relativism you subscribe to give every radical vegan a perfect validation of their actions. They could engage in terrorism and be perfectly morally justified, because morality is simply a matter of perspective.

Nothing of what I said precludes questioning the ethics of something or changing the status quo. What you are demonstrating here is that veganism can't even be question. That is not even post-modern, that's modern. Your trying to impose an absolute rule and the fact is most people judging by how they live and think don't agree with the premise that animals have the same status as a person. That doesn't mean that there is no value what so ever to be gained from dialogue, for example vegans have been a positive influence on animal welfare in factory in farming. However, it is like I said, the value of veganism is the critique not the means. Acting as if veganism is inherently correct comes of as short-sighted and myopic. It assumes people think the same which is my biggest critique.

Animal exploitation is not equivalent to slavery. While you could have an argument in terms of welfare the fact is that animals aren't people. A human in slavery is not the same as a chicken coup. To compare the two as equal is ridiculous and childish.

Veganism is extreme relative to what is normative. When I call veganism extreme is descriptive not pejorative. And its perfectly fair to call veganism extreme considering the lengths you have to alter your lifestyle to be vegan not to mention the often cult-like and misanthropic community that subscribes to the ideology.

[Something Funny]

@Buck Edwards so you post a video of trolls intentionally coming to a vegan protest to start conflict provocation and then act surprised when people get into an argument with them? Makes sense.

[Something Funny]

1 hour ago, Basman said:

Ascribing altruism to animals isn't something everybody is going to agree on to the same extent that vegans tend to do.

Wdym by ascribing altruism?

1 hour ago, Basman said:

The problem with veganism, or at least the more extreme version of P. Singer, is that it prioritizes individuals over systems. 

Mind elaborate?

1 hour ago, Basman said:

If you start giving every animal rights you start undermining human society as well as natural ecosystems. That is when you get people who release fur minks into the wild, which then devastate the ecosystem driving native bird species to extinction.

Silly strawman example that has very little to do with what veganism actually advocates for. Are you able to give any serious examples of how people going vegan would harm our society. Lets say 50% of human population went vegan, drastically dropping demand for animal product. How would that undermine society as well as natural ecosystems?

Also, I love how you conveniently not consider animal farming as something that undermines natural ecosystems. When its effects are disproportionately larger than what some random vegan activists could do in a 100 years if they made raiding mink farms their favorite weekend activity. 

Edited Tuesday at 11:46 PM by Something Funny

[Something Funny]

14 hours ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

Notice how he thinks of animals as children. Typical vegan. That's so sad. Animals do look cute but you should have your own children to protect

Why? According to who? What's wrong with treating animals as children?

[Something Funny]

19 hours ago, sholomar said:

David Hawkins warned about the spiritual ego but it seems like a lot of people into spiritual self help have large ones and rather than focusing on radical acceptance, they'd rather turn into political activists.

So you are suggesting that a spiritual person shouldn't meddle in political affairs at all? If I want to be spiritual I need to be completely detached from the real world issues?

Also, if you care so much about radical acceptance, what about accepting your spiritual ego?

[vibv]

All this is about defining what it means to be HUMAN. That's what this whole reality is about.

Do we really want to milk and butcher all those animals just to feed our insatiable hunger for meat? Is that what it means to be human? This is the reason I became vegan.

But I don't pass any judgement on people who eat meat, because what's the point? I myself eat meat from time to time nowadays and it's completely fine - I have nothing against it. It's the way it gets mass-produced without regard for the suffering of everything that isn't human is what I critique.

What does it mean to be human?

I think we're able to make the lives of every living being on this planet better. Animals could BENEFIT of our being here. We could make this earth a literal paradise if we just chose to do so. So what's stopping us?

Edited Tuesday at 11:57 PM by vibv

[Something Funny]

2 minutes ago, vibv said:

So what's stopping us?

Just read the comments here, I think it's pretty obvious. A bunch of clowns with zero intellectual integrity, unable to even have a serious discussion about the topic.

And this is the spirituality/philosophy/personal development forum. Elsewhere is even worse.