Another thing. He called me a murderer because I eat meat. I would love to return to the NATURAL ORDER of things and hunt for my meat and gather for my fruits, but this society doesn't allow for that. Just like this society doesn't allow for someone to have a more free animal policies in suburban areas.
Who are you babbling about?
my DM
He loves to argue. I need back up... or not 
He called me a murderer because I eat meat.
Your DM is an arse. End of discussion.
my DM
He's an idiot.
Rule #1, don't argue with idiots.
He called me a murderer because I eat meat.
Defecate on his good linens and then stop being friends with him.
My dog comes home on his own.
i like that
He called me a murderer because I eat meat.
So is he for eating veggies. They are living beings too, unless he eats dirt.
#2: All life survives at the cost of another life (be it plant, animal, or human). That's how the universe works. The only way to get around it is to starve yourself. It's not wrong for a lion to hunt and kill a gazelle any more than it is for me to have my Double Bacon Western Cheeseburger at Carls Jr (Hardy's, for you folk on the east coast).
#3: Humans are natural predators. Our digestive systems promote a substantial meat diet, we have canines for tearing meat, and we have forward-set eyes, a trait that only predators have in nature.
#4: All life is sacred, unless it's delicious.
#5: I would not attack him for owning pets, because a pet is part of your family, and it's not as much a master/slave relationship as it is a father/child relationship. Kick his butt for owning 10, though. That can't be sanitary.
#6: What religion is he, if you know? I might be able to work up a religious argument for him.
EDIT: Also, read this, this, and this. (Warning: very strong language throughout the linked site. Not for children.)
Another thing. He called me a murderer because I eat meat.
Then he is just being acting more holy then you.
You can't exist in this world without treading on/killing another life.
His cats are all killers as well. In fact I am willing to bet his cats will maim and play for hours before sitting down to do the deed.
Your friend is just trying to feel good about himself, pay him no mind and tell him not to preach next time he starts up.
You will never win this fight with your friend so trying is kinda silly.
#1: If he tries to lay a guilt trip on you for eating meat, just remind him that more animals die in the cultivation and harvesting of fruits and vegetables than in the raising and slaughtering of animals for meat. Insecticides, rodents getting torn up in farm equipment, etc. Billions every year.
#2: All life survives at the cost of another life (be it plant, animal, or human). That's how the universe works. The only way to get around it is to starve yourself. It's not wrong for a lion to hunt and kill a gazelle any more than it is for me to have my Double Bacon Western Cheeseburger at Carls Jr (Hardy's, for you folk on the east coast).
#3: Humans are natural predators. Our digestive systems promote a substantial meat diet, we have canines for tearing meat, and we have forward-set eyes, a trait that only predators have in nature.
#4: All life is sacred, unless it's delicious.
#5: I would not attack him for owning pets, because a pet is part of your family, and it's not as much a master/slave relationship as it is a father/child relationship. Kick his butt for owning 10, though. That can't be sanitary.
#6: What religion is he, if you know? I might be able to work up a religious argument for him.
EDIT: Also, read this, this, and this. (Warning: very strong language throughout the linked site. Not for children.)
I am with you all the way but for #3.
I think there is a good argument that meat might not have been on the menu for us from the get go but we sure had the option to partake. Why we started making meat our food of choice I am not sure but I don't mind.
These are the animals we feel the most kinship with remember.
also... if you hunt on private property, you only need to get a license if you catch anything.
You just need to get a friend who owns a farm.
Oh, and if gets on you about how meat is murder, say "he found out, now we have to kill him"
I am with you all the way but for #3.
I think there is a good argument that meat might not have been on the menu for us from the get go but we sure had the option to partake. Why we started making meat our food of choice I am not sure but I don't mind.
I've not heard one such argument that didn't sound like a load of bull (mmm.... steak....).
As for me, I don't consider any amount of food a meal unless it has meat in it. No meat = snack.
Eat meat in front of him.
also... if you hunt on private property, you only need to get a license if you catch anything.
You just need to get a friend who owns a farm.
Oh, and if gets on you about how meat is murder, say "he found out, now we have to kill him"
Eating meat in front of him out of spite is just obnoxious, and will do nothing but hurt a friendship. It would be like lighting up a cigarette right in front of someone because you know they can't stand cigarette smoke.
"Maybe, but its not homicide, and I can live with that."
"Yes it is!"
"No, its not. Homicide is abreviated latin for killing a human being. This ham sandwich is not a human being. Therefore, not homicide. Its murder I can live with."
"Meat is murder!"
"Maybe, but its not homicide, and I can live with that."
"Yes it is!"
"No, its not. Homicide is abreviated latin for killing a human being. This ham sandwich is not a human being. Therefore, not homicide. Its murder I can live with."
:heehee
I could live with killing a few people too, If I had a good reason.
That's a rather scary thought when you remember that your average chimpanzee is five times as strong as your average human.
I was watching a documentary on it the other day. Something about being herbivores which needed to tell depth (monkeys JUMP!), from there we developed predatory traits.
However: Humans are some of the most violent and destructive things to be churned out by nature. Hell, we have evolved an aggressive response to danger. Stop and think about it.
A big catr or pack of wolves that gets hurt by their prey, or encounters a larger predator, backs down.
When confronted by overwhelming odds and great personal harm the average human male becomes agressive. VERY aggressive. A pack of humans has almost no personal survival instinct. We are hardwired to promote the survival of the group even if it costs our own lives.
About humans being natural predators: Our predation is an acquired thing. It developed after we gained our forward-facing eyes.
My eyes faced forward from birth, dunno about you...
I was watching a documentary on it the other day. Something about being herbivores which needed to tell depth (monkeys JUMP!), from there we developed predatory traits.
I have it on good authority that the first humans ever did, in fact eat meat. Abel kept flocks and harvested meat.
However: Humans are some of the most violent and destructive things to be churned out by nature. Hell, we have evolved an aggressive response to danger. Stop and think about it.
A big catr or pack of wolves that gets hurt by their prey, or encounters a larger predator, backs down.
When confronted by overwhelming odds and great personal harm the average human male becomes agressive. VERY aggressive. A pack of humans has almost no personal survival instinct. We are hardwired to promote the survival of the group even if it costs our own lives.
Actually, most mammals have an aggressive reaction to danger. It only makes sense. In regards a human's willingness to sacrifice himself for the good of the group, that's attributable to a human's unique mindset. A human does not endanger itself without need, and if that need is great enough, a human heart is strong enough to endure pain and even death itself to meet that need.
My eyes faced forward from birth, dunno about you...
I have it on good authority that the first humans ever did, in fact eat meat. Abel kept flocks and harvested meat.
And Harry Potter defeated Voldemort. A story is just a story.
However: Humans are some of the most violent and destructive things to be churned out by nature. Hell, we have evolved an aggressive response to danger. Stop and think about it.
A big catr or pack of wolves that gets hurt by their prey, or encounters a larger predator, backs down.
When confronted by overwhelming odds and great personal harm the average human male becomes agressive. VERY aggressive. A pack of humans has almost no personal survival instinct. We are hardwired to promote the survival of the group even if it costs our own lives.
And yet there's few things more dangerous in nature than a wounded animal. A lion or bear that's injured becomes a dramatically more aggressive animal. African buffalo have been known to double back and ambush their pursuers. Even animals normally known for their relatively gentle natures will bite, scratch, and kick when cornered.
And vegetarians cause global warming.
Explaination
Plants create O2, vegetarians eat plants, thereby eating the solution.
Animals create CO2 + Methane, I eat the problem.
Animals create CO2 + Methane, I eat the problem.
10 pets is slavery. 1~2 is ok. 3 is pushing it.
And vegetarians cause global warming.ExplainationPlants create O2, vegetarians eat plants, thereby eating the solution.
Animals create CO2 + Methane, I eat the problem.
President Bush, because President Bush is doubly especially evil; he caused Hurricane Katrina, if you recall
I also heard he likes to punch kids while in their strollers and then steal their candy.
I don't understand how a animal loving vegan, meat=murder kind of person keep 10+ pets emprisoned in a house. Saying that meat is murder and caring for animal rights is your thing, how can you willfully keep an animal, which if left in the wild its whole life, can live a healthly life and fall into THE NATURAL ORDER like it was entended too.
If they love the animal like it's their child then they basically believe they are doing the right thing. Although I agree that 10+ animals is a bit much.
But no, they keep them in a house, having to behave properly in order to earn its dinner. If I was an extreme animal lover( I concider a vegan with 10+ animal extreme) I couldn't live with myself to take a feline, a natural born hunter, strip it of all its natural instincts, and domesticate it, keep it in a house all day because if it goes outside it gets fleas or runs away or gets run over .
Ok...this particular point I disagree with b/c I work at a cat hospital. The fact is that domesticate house cats have been domesticated for centuries and very little is going to change that. Cats that have been left to fend for themselves on city streets are feral(domesticate bred but not raised) and often run into major health problems...not the least of which is cars. It's true that they're often able to live without direct human aid, but they are also diseased, underfed, and usually kill off large numbers of small indigenous animals in their area. I'm not saying that having 10+ animals is a good idea, but letting felines "roam free" is also not a good idea.
Also, it's true that felines have natural hunting instincts but those instincts haven't been selected for when breeding domestic cats. They'll still chase birds but most house cats I know(and I know a couple hundred) are just as happy chasing a feather toy or a stuffed mouse. Humans are smart and we came up with ways to satiate our feline friends' hunting instincts via toys.
If you're going to stand on the side of animal rights, shouldn't pet owning = slavery?? They have no free will. They are caged and doing the bidding of a master at that point.
Ok, this is an argument I've heard before and while I think I understand where you're coming from...I have to disagree. I'm a supporter of animal welfare and animal rights, but I see nothing wrong with owning pets. Domestic cats and dogs have been bred for years to depend on humans. As I mentioned above, they may be able to eke out a living without us, but it's much easier for them when they live with us. Also, I have yet to meet a house cat that doesn't have more than enough free will to let me know it does NOT want it's temperature taken or ignore it's owner's order of "Fluffy come here...I promise the nice tech isn't going to hurt you"....yeah that NEVER works...and don't forget the dogs that refuse to come, sit or stay...that is FREE WILL because they're choosing to not perform a command(or you just trained them REALLY badly :P )
Another thing. He called me a murderer because I eat meat. I would love to return to the NATURAL ORDER of things and hunt for my meat and gather for my fruits, but this society doesn't allow for that.
Ok I agree that he shouldn't call you a murderer for eating meat. I love meat personally and do not consider myself a murderer at all.
If he starts the whole "you're killing a living being" argument I would calmly point out that every time he puts Advantage on one of his pets he's killing HUNDREDS of living organisms and their unborn young...it might not shut him up but it's worth a shot.
Just like this society doesn't allow for someone to have a more free animal policies in suburban areas.
I think I covered the whole domestic vs wild issue already, but to recap:
Domecticated animals (even if they've gone feral) are not as fully equipped to deal with life "in the wild" as their wild predecessors because we specifically bred them for traits we desired and not what was most effective for "natural living".
And in case anyone missed it...I agree that 10+ pets is too many.
And all this talk about meat is making me hungry.
#1: If he tries to lay a guilt trip on you for eating meat, just remind him that more animals die in the cultivation and harvesting of fruits and vegetables than in the raising and slaughtering of animals for meat. Insecticides, rodents getting torn up in farm equipment, etc. Billions every year.
#2: All life survives at the cost of another life (be it plant, animal, or human). That's how the universe works. The only way to get around it is to starve yourself. It's not wrong for a lion to hunt and kill a gazelle any more than it is for me to have my Double Bacon Western Cheeseburger at Carls Jr (Hardy's, for you folk on the east coast).
#3: Humans are natural predators. Our digestive systems promote a substantial meat diet, we have canines for tearing meat, and we have forward-set eyes, a trait that only predators have in nature.
#4: All life is sacred, unless it's delicious.
#5: I would not attack him for owning pets, because a pet is part of your family, and it's not as much a master/slave relationship as it is a father/child relationship. Kick his butt for owning 10, though. That can't be sanitary.
#6: What religion is he, if you know? I might be able to work up a religious argument for him.
EDIT: Also, read this, this, and this. (Warning: very strong language throughout the linked site. Not for children.)
After reading the forward set eyes, i just envision your DM's eyes on the side of his head, eating a carrott. Let me quess he goes to the bathroom in a litter box. I believe in animal rights, but owning 10 cats thats just crazy. It reminds me of the crazy cat lady on the simpsons. Oh well to each his own, but if I were you I would bring Beef Jerky to all his games and say how much you like it after every bite.;)
I like to think of the human-cat relationship being a symbiotic relationship, based on mutual contempt
I saw an ad recently for a device to quickly and easily trim pet claws. I thought of ordering it right up until the moment they referred to people as "pet parents", at which point I told them, through my TV, to go **** themselves in the ear and ate a raw steak.
I am also a member of PETA: People for Eating Tasty Animals. Yumm. Animals.
And Harry Potter defeated Voldemort. A story is just a story.
What's a little bigotry amoung friends, right?
What's a little bigotry amoung friends, right?
And how was my comment in any way bigotry?
But, I guess it's not bigotry if it's against Christians? Is that what you're saying? Does seem to be the norm around here..
Because it's insulting and directly slanted against a literalist Christian who is on these forums? Pretty much saying the same as "You Jews and your silly stories!"
But, I guess it's not bigotry if it's against Christians? Is that what you're saying? Does seem to be the norm around here..
My making a snarky comment against someone who is trying to present a story of from the bible as FACT, and proof that evolution as being wrong isn't bigotted.
Trying to present the bible as fact isn't an opinion, any more than someone claiming that water is made up of equal parts of puppies and Tang is just expressing their opinion. It's not being a bigot to point out when someone's facts are wrong.
That is, by definition, bigotry.
Doesn't matter. This isn't a court of law or a scientific debating forum. This is a public forum about gaming that HAPPENS to talk about other issues. You felt the need to insult a literal Christian in no uncertain terms primarily for the point of doing that. There were a hundred ways to address his comment, you chose to be mean-spirited and hateful based on his religious beliefs.
That is, by definition, bigotry.
It does matter. He tried to present the bible as proof against evolution. That isn't an opinion I'm addressing, and I'm not being bigotted by telling him his facts are wrong. Yes my comments were snarky, and I could have chose a different way to address them, I didn't. It still doesn't make the comment bigotted.
It still doesn't make the comment bigotted.
I'm sorry, but it does, by definition. As I said, you chose one of the most hateful ways you could express your statement that you could, while getting away with it on these forums.
Really, you owe him an apology, and a simple statement of 'many of us don't interpret the Bible literally, and therefore do not accept that as fact' would have sufficed.
I'm sorry, but it does, by definition. As I said, you chose one of the most hateful ways you could express your statement that you could, while getting away with it on these forums.
Really, you owe him an apology, and a simple statement of 'many of us don't interpret the Bible literally, and therefore do not accept that as fact' would have sufficed.
No it doesn't. The definition of Bigotry I have is:
Stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.
His statement isn't any of these, as it's not a creed, belief or an opinion. It was something that someone presented as a fact, which wasn't a fact. "The bible is proof that evolution did not occur" is not an opinion.
If you have a different definition, please present it.
And I don't owe him an apology, since I'm not sorry I said it. His "Fact" was wrong, and I made a snarky comment about it.
I neither desire nor expect an apology from anyone, but I would like to illustrate how I see the exchange.
I'm standing in front of a bridge that crosses an unfathomably deep expanse. People say the bridge is fine to cross, but I know better. You walk up, and I warn you against walking across the bridge, telling you it's not safe. You tell me what an idiot I am for thinking so, and walk across anyways. I don't hold it against you, because I'm too busy feeling sorry for you when you fall to your death.
So no, I'm not offended that you disagree with me, I'm just sorry for you.
Actually, I wasn't presenting it as evidence in an argument. I was making the statement for the purpose of expressing a point of view which disagrees with a previously posted point of view. Granted, I was being a little sarcastic myself, because that's just how I am.
See, he wasn't offended. Now we can all move on.
I'm standing in front of a bridge that crosses an unfathomably deep expanse. People say the bridge is fine to cross, but I know better. You walk up, and I warn you against walking across the bridge, telling you it's not safe. You tell me what an idiot I am for thinking so, and walk across anyways. I don't hold it against you, because I'm too busy feeling sorry for you when you fall to your death.
Except, that hundreds of Structural Engineers have proclaimed the bridge to be safe. Do I believe the lone guy on the side of the road yelling that bridge is dangerous, or do I believe the Engineers, 'specially when the Engineers explanations make the most sense, and the lone guy on the side of the road is getting his information from a book that has nothing to do with Bridges?
See, he was offended. Now we can all move on.
Not sure what you're trying to accomplish here, as I specifically stated I was not offended. You cannot offend me.
Except, that hundreds of Structural Engineers have proclaimed the bridge to be safe. Do I believe the lone guy on the side of the road yelling that bridge is dangerous, or do I believe the Engineers, 'specially when the Engineers explanations make the most sense, and the lone guy on the side of the road is getting his information from a book that has nothing to do with Bridges?
How much good is that rationalizing going to do you when you start falling? Maybe then you'll realize that none of the "engineers" so much as left their cozy offices to check the bridge before announcing it safe. They just believe it to be so because someone told them it was so. Also, for the purpose of this metaphor, the book has everything to do with bridges.
Just stop arguing before the thread is locked, It was getting pretty funny. The war between Evolutionists and creationists will not be won short of killing all of the opposing party, so don't even bother.
------
Now back to lambasting vegetarians.
Not sure what you're trying to accomplish here, as I specifically stated I was not offended. You cannot offend me.
I was addressing the other guy with that comment, actually.
How much good is that rationalizing going to do you when you start falling? Maybe then you'll realize that none of the "engineers" so much as left their cozy offices to check the bridge before announcing it safe. They just believe it to be so because someone told them it was so. Also, for the purpose of this metaphor, the book has everything to do with bridges.
It's not rationalizing at all. The Engineers are trained, and have their evidence of the bridges safety that has been peer reviewed, and tested multiple times by many other engineers. The evidence of the bridges stability has been added on for over a century, and all the evidence meshes with the engineers findings.
On the other hand, the book about fishing, which contained contraditions, mistakes, and straight out errors, is being used by the lone guy on the side of the road as proof the bridge will collapse.
It's not rationalizing at all. The Engineers are trained, and have their evidence of the bridges safety that has been peer reviewed, and tested multiple times by many other engineers. The evidence of the bridges stability has been added on for over a century, and all the evidence meshes with the engineers findings.
One major problem with your theory... the Engineers are all self-serving and self-referencing, and WANT you to believe the bridges are safe, and have agreed to push that through to the 'people'.
And any time you find out about ANOTHER bridge that fell, you're told that it was some 'unrelated issue' and certainly THIS time, that bridge won't fall...
One major problem with your theory... the Engineers are all self-serving and self-referencing, and WANT you to believe the bridges are safe, and have agreed to push that through to the 'people'.
And any time you find out about ANOTHER bridge that fell, you're told that it was some 'unrelated issue' and certainly THIS time, that bridge won't fall...
Not to mention that the engineers constantly try to shut down anyone who says the bridge isn't safe.
Regarding the domestication of animals as being a bad thing, well.. aren't humans domesticated? Er, I mean, civilized? See? Us pet owners are holding back the savage bands of marauding puppy barbarians from seizing the land! We're doing a service to.. puppydom!
basically, because we lived closeley with canines, loosing nasal capacity (which you need to do to talk) wasn't an evolutionary disadvantage - they would bark when they smelled predators, and so we didn't need to have as good a sence of smell outselves
That is, by definition, bigotry.
Pointing out that a story is fictional is not bigotry, not matter how strongly someone believes that story to be true.
I'm standing in front of a bridge that crosses an unfathomably deep expanse. People say the bridge is fine to cross, but I know better. You walk up, and I warn you against walking across the bridge, telling you it's not safe. You tell me what an idiot I am for thinking so, and walk across anyways. I don't hold it against you, because I'm too busy feeling sorry for you when you fall to your death.
Self delusion ≠ "knowing better".
A bridge is a real, solid thing - proven and trustworthy. I'll trust my life to that before the belief that if I clap my hands and wish hard enough a gentle, loving breeze will carry me across.
So no, I'm not offended that you disagree with me, I'm just sorry for you.
Save you pity.
There is an interesting piece i read a few years ago, that boils down to stating that the capacity for speach only evolved because of a symbiotic relationship between humans and dogs
Which would be great if human speech didn't predate domestication of canines by about 1.6 million years.
Engineering is literally thousands of years old. Evolutionary Biology is about a century and a half old. We evolutionists still have lots of work to do yet.
Christians seek to do to our country what the Muslims did to Saudi Arabia: reduce our nation to a backwards primitive society where thought and tech is stunted to uselessness, and a religious police clubs anyone who doesn't fall in line.
And before anyone cries "Bigotry! Bigotry!", think of it this way: Do you object to Satanists taking over and making satanism-themed laws that don't make any sense? Then you're just as much of a bigot as I am and you technically can't say one word to me.
I don't understand how a animal loving vegan, meat=murder kind of person keep 10+ pets emprisoned in a house. Saying that meat is murder and caring for animal rights is your thing, how can you willfully keep an animal, which if left in the wild its whole life, can live a healthly life and fall into THE NATURAL ORDER like it was entended too. But no, they keep them in a house, having to behave properly in order to earn its dinner. If I was an extreme animal lover( I concider a vegan with 10+ animal extreme) I couldn't live with myself to take a feline, a natural born hunter, strip it of all its natural instincts, and domesticate it, keep it in a house all day because if it goes outside it gets fleas or runs away or gets run over. If you're going to stand on the side of animal rights, shouldn't pet owning = slavery?? They have no free will. They are caged and doing the bidding of a master at that point.
Another thing. He called me a murderer because I eat meat. I would love to return to the NATURAL ORDER of things and hunt for my meat and gather for my fruits, but this society doesn't allow for that. Just like this society doesn't allow for someone to have a more free animal policies in suburban areas.
So if we are going along that logic, pets are slaves then meat eating is cannibalism.
So when I feed my dog scraps of meat from my steak I'm.... forcing cannibalism on him.
That makes it so much more awesome. Now if you excuse me I have to go eat my normal lunch of dolphin brains and baby seal eyes.
Christians seek to do to our country what the Muslims did to Saudi Arabia: reduce our nation to a backwards primitive society where thought and tech is stunted to uselessness, and a religious police clubs anyone who doesn't fall in line.
Look, I've got my own issues with organized religion, but this is just a little bit ... uhh ... over-generalizing, no? You do understand there are plenty of Christians that believe in evolution and have no problem with the advances gained from technological pursuit, right? Blanket statements =
And before anyone cries "Bigotry! Bigotry!", think of it this way: Do you object to Satanists taking over and making satanism-themed laws that don't make any sense? Then you're just as much of a bigot as I am and you technically can't say one word to me.
Right. So since I am a human and you are a human, I can't call you human? What you said was bigoted - as evidenced by the blanket coverage you gave Christians. And the fact that you blame them for a problem that does not even exist. You cannot use the fact that there are other bigots in the world to absolve yourself of your own bigotry.
Christians seek to do to our country what the Muslims did to Saudi Arabia: reduce our nation to a backwards primitive society where thought and tech is stunted to uselessness, and a religious police clubs anyone who doesn't fall in line.
Wow... just wow. The things people feel comfortable saying on the internet...
Umm, if we are making things up with no validation maybe I will try...
... hey, look, a faked picture of bigfoot! Clearly, those dirty christians are trying to make a mockery of the missing link through planting hoaxes! It must be part of their world-wide plot to discredit Darwin! They are trying to reduce us to animals I say! Animals! Next they will have us functioning like a country based on a religion that is nothing like their own! We must shield ourselves from their vodoo mysticism and belief in pacifistic ideals lest the world come to ruin!
Also, read this, this, and this. (Warning: very strong language throughout the linked site. Not for children.)
I pray to the powers that be that that man doesn't actually believe what he writes.
Anyway, many gaming groups have self-righteous players or GMs. You just gotta roll with the punches. Meaning, of course, punch the arrogant little prick in the face whenever he gets annoying. You can tell him I suggested it, because I'm certain I don't know him.
How much good is that rationalizing going to do you when you start falling? Maybe then you'll realize that none of the "engineers" so much as left their cozy offices to check the bridge before announcing it safe. They just believe it to be so because someone told them it was so. Also, for the purpose of this metaphor, the book has everything to do with bridges.
Now, I'd rather not go into my own religious beliefs, but this strikes me as a little odd.
You're saying he believes something just because it was told to him, and that it's bad because of that.
How is that any different from someone telling you that the Bible is the word of God? You never saw God write it. God didn't hand you an autographed copy. You just believe it to be so because someone told you it was so. Or perhaps, "you know it in your heart", or something, which essentially amounts to believing something because you told yourself enough times.
I am in no way stating that your beliefs are necessarily wrong. Heck, my post could be flipped around entirely. Just for fun, let's take a look at that.
How is that any different from someone telling you evolution is the truth? You weren't around 65 million years ago to see the last of the dinosaurs. Birds don't look like they evolved from reptiles. You just believe it to be so because someone told you it was so. Or you did a test designed by someone else, which essentially amounts to the same thing.
This is why these debates are best left out of threads not centered around them. No one is going to change anyone's view, and it just detracts from the thread as a whole.
If global warming were more than a political scare tactic, I'm sure it would be blamed on SUVs and President Bush.
It can't be:
• Animals, because animals are incapable of wrong-doing
• The Sun, which can't possibly be responsible for heating up the planet
• Volcanos, which put out about as much atmospheric pollution per year as all of America
• Wildfires and other natural disasters that burn over hundreds of thousands of acres per day sometimes.
So it must be:
• Humans, because all humans are evil
• Americans, because Americans are especially evil
• President Bush, because President Bush is doubly especially evil; he caused Hurricane Katrina, if you recall
Bush appointed his unqualified freinds to head FEMA. They had no experience and yes, lives could have been saved if he had appointed qualified people. If you are planning to have children, I would advise you to revise your position.
Bush appointed his unqualified freinds to head FEMA. They had no experience and yes, lives could have been saved if he had appointed qualified people. If you are planning to have children, I would advise you to revise your position.
Actually, you're wrong, as well as spilling out a constantly disproven partisan lie.
The only delays caused during Katrina of real significance is because the Governor of Louisiana refused to ask for Federal aid for 72 hours after the impact of the storm. And, according to our Constitution, it is illegal for the Federal Government to step in without the express consent of the state government.
Why Blanco waited is anyone's guess. I don't have an answer for that, though my suspicion was that it was politically motivated. But she not only did not ask in a timely fashion, she REFUSED to allow assistance when President Bush called her.
FEMA's faults were more procedural, and definately were not 'first response' issues, since 'first response' is not part of the Federal Government's duties.
Bush appointed his unqualified freinds to head FEMA. They had no experience and yes, lives could have been saved if he had appointed qualified people. If you are planning to have children, I would advise you to revise your position.
What I find interesting is that the people that are so quick to criticize the response to Katrina are the same that forget Katrina was, in fact, a friggin' hurricane. We all wanted help to get there the minute it was over. We did. However, when moving support into an area that has been devastated by a natural disaster of this magnitude, it's a little more complicated than gassing up a couple of Hummers and taking a drive to the site. The place was annihilated. Flooded. Destroyed. It simply was not possible to be there with lightning speed. It gets forgotten that the military support, Red Cross, FEMA, etc were not there hiding safely underground as the storm ravaged the area, ready to pop up and help as soon as it passed. They were, in fact, not anywhere near the area. They had to get there. With no roads, airports, places to land, etc and no ready supply of stored boats, they had a rough time of it. Go figure. The real blame does not lie with the response but with the budget conscious number crunchers that originally decided that the levies would be OK when spec'd to handle nothing more than a cat 3 storm. If they had spent a bit more in the first place, the levies may well have held. But, since they didn't, it must be incompetance. Gotcha.
Just try to understand that we do not have teleporters yet. Until we do, we have to drive and fly to get where help is needed. Since we need to do that, natural disasters of this scale will impact this greatly. Hell, two years ago - where I live - a huge thunderstorm came through and flooded roads that I have never seen flooded before. It took me 90 mins to make a 5 min drive. Now, let's take this small example and extrapolate a bit to see the effect a hurricane can have on travel. And multiply my car to be a column of military vehicles. They ain't gettin' there at light speed. Believe it or not, response to an area that has been made nearly impossible to access does take time.
Feral cats (domestic cats who have been released into nature) are a major destructive force in the wild and tend to ruin ecosystems.
It is not a kindness to most breeds of cats who have been selectively bred to enjoy and rely upon human contact. A siamese will not be happier in the wild than they are living with a human.
What is wrong with having pets? I love my dogs. Humans have been demesticating animals for thousands of years. If we hadn't you would probably still be living in a cave.
Aren't pigs domesticated boars? So does PETA want me to be boarknight?
Just remember, PETA euthanizes animals.
So they want to kill me
If it makes you feel better, I'm sure everybody else does, too. At least a little.
Oh wait...
PETA are a bunch of fanatical, hypocritical scumbags who endorse and financially support domestic terrorism.
Here Here!!!! I work at a vet hospital and NONE of us are PETA members.
He called me a murderer because I eat meat.
I disagree: you did not kill the animal (I presume). and you, as one person, are not forcing anyones hand to kill animals. farmers and butchers won't stop because of 1 person. In fact ... what about all the poor butchers that would go bankrupt if everyone stopped eating meat?
I disagree: you did not kill the animal (I presume). and you, as one person, are not forcing anyones hand to kill animals. farmers and butchers won't stop because of 1 person. In fact ... what about all the poor butchers that would go bankrupt if everyone stopped eating meat?
And what would happen to the cows if they weren't needed for food?
And what would happen to the cows if they weren't needed for food?
Euthanized to make room for crops!
lol I am glad we are omnivores. <3 Meat
Euthanized to make room for crops!
lol I am glad we are omnivores. <3 Meat
+1 :D
Those that love animals...
Those that hate plants...
In native american there was a word similar to vegetarian which meant "man who could not hunt."
Euthanized to make room for crops!
Damn, there goes my image of some kind of wandering cow circus.
I think there are two types of vegetarians...
Those that love animals...
Those that hate plants...
In native american there was a word similar to vegetarian which meant "man who could not hunt."
Win.
Damn, there goes my image of some kind of wandering cow circus.
I now have an image of Cows on the trapeze.
I now have an image of Cows on the trapeze.
Welcome to my world.
You could have Cows doing tricks like bears, and Cows jumping through flaming hoops, and 20 cows getting out of a little car.
I'm in. Just let me know where and when.
I really want to see a cow shot from a cannon now.
You could have Cows doing tricks like bears, and Cows jumping through flaming hoops, and 20 cows getting out of a little car.
Do you think there are midget cows? Like humans have dwarves and little people (damnit on a D&D forum the PC terms sound like fantasy races). Or cows with gigantism.
Because that would be cool.
Guys you are not being respectful to the Hindu religion...
Thats ok. I'm not respectful of religion.
http://www.minicattle.com/index.cfm
Thats ok. I'm not respectful of religion.
You picked the wrong one...
Death by cow it is...
[joke]wholething[/joke]
Well what do you know...
http://www.minicattle.com/index.cfm
Duh. That's where White Castle gets the meat for it's mini burgers. ;) :P
Guys you are not being respectful to the Hindu religion...
Not at all, the cows are beloved by the Hindus because they arrived first when Vishnu played his flute and they used to dance and perform in front of Vishnu as he played.
It's a celebration of the Hindu religion.
I wonder if we can keep them as pets? Little cow bed over in the corner. Taking your cow for a walk, go on David Letterman for Stupid Pet Tricks.
I wonder just how small we could get them. You could have a mini-bull that charges down mouse holes to get rid of rodents.
The mini running of the bulls.
I wonder just how small we could get them. You could have a mini-bull that charges down mouse holes to get rid of rodents.
The mini running of the bulls.
Flying Mini Bulls. Little birds of prey hunting down birds that chirp too early in the morning. I really, really want one.
Solution...we are getting goats!
...oh and 'summon cow' from Balder Gate II
nice memories@Cannaith
Somehow I don't think the hindu's will see 'eating cowmeat' as a tribute to them
I wonder just how small we could get them. You could have a mini-bull that charges down mouse holes to get rid of rodents.
The mini running of the bulls.
Well, so far they've gotten them tiny enough to put in those cans of Red Bull, although that color just can't be natural....
Although, I dunno, maybe they just squeeze them for the juice instead of putting the whole bull in the can....
As far as the original post....
A.) If the person in question has more animals than his environment (and/or paycheck) can support, then that is not a good thing...
B.) If everyone on the planet suddenly (or even gradually) shifted to complete vegetarianism, within the next decade or two the entire planet would be devoid of foliage - everything non-edible would have been razed in order to create more room to grow edible crops. Which coincidentally would just happen to destroy the entire ecosystem of the planet.
We'd have to start eating people just to first cull the population of the planet down to a number of completely herbivorous people that the planet could sustain. :D
Personally, I'm on a strict-vegetarian diet myself...
I only eat Vegans.
In all honesty, though, I personally believe that anything I eat is welcome to try to eat me first, and if it doesn't succeed then I guess natural selection chose me instead. < shrug >
Of course, competing for survival against a cheeseburger isn't much of a fight, but still, it's the principle of the thing...
If we ever do find ourselves in an end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it situation where we're all forced to fend completely for ourselves, do give me your DM's address, will you? I'll bring the barbecue sauce. :D
One source of CO2 down...6 trillion to go.
Personally, I'm on a strict-vegetarian diet myself...
I only eat Vegans.
You know that does seem to be what it is we do to herbivores.
I am not creative enough at this moment to find something really good to offend a veggie, so here's my best shot:
I have a freezer full of venicine the freezer in my basement.
... there is no cow level.
You Win the thread.
Oh and Meat is the only food group. Everything else wishes it was meat.
Oh and Meat is the only food group.
Actually, there are two food groups: Meat, and what meat eats.
If you go by the old tribes, such as pre colonisation Maoris (believed by doctors at the time to be the most physically perfect human specimen on earth at the time), or the Masai (who ate meat and were way stronger than the surrounding tribes who didn't), we're meant to eat mainly fruit (hence the colour vision and the grasping hands and not digging claws a vegetable eater would have), but a smaller yet extremely important amount of meat and seafood (hence the forward facing eyes and canine teeth), about 80/20, give or take 10 percent.
It has even been put forward that we were scavenges who started bashing animal bones with rocks to get at the marrow after the hyenas and vultures got bored and left the carcasses, thus leading to tool use.
And we gained a great deal of intelligence by outwitting leopards and stealing the kills they had hidden in the trees. So basically we evolved from ninja pirate monkeys.
You know chimpanzees eat smaller monkeys right? And Orang Utans eat termites and stuff? And they're both the most genetically similar to humans in the entire animal kingdom.
Not quite. Both gorillas and bonobos are closer to humans that are orangutans.
maybe, but not chimps, they're like 99% genetically the same as us.
It's 98.x%, but it's really not that big a deal. Bananas share 50% of our genetic code.
It's 98.x%, but it's really not that big a deal. Bananas share 50% of our genetic code.
And you ********s ate him! He was my brother!!! NOOOOO, BANANA!!!!!!!!
I got nothing against vegetarians or vegans for that matter, save the reactionary ones that get in one's face and talk alot of sh-t for political reasons...meanwhile, they're wearing leather shoes and jackets often enough.
Yes, we (americans) eat way more meat than we should, it's not always processed humanely (though we don't waste a drop), and all manner of moral and ethical implications are involved.
But, we're animals and animals eat each other sometimes. That is, it's hard to stop a train, you know?
For the rest, I simply say, "Proof is in the teeth (canines)." Eventually, this will come to pass and we'll probably evolve into herbivores. Taller, skinnier, lose the body hair, bigger cranial mass, larger eyes, smaller noses and ears, then we shrink overall, get larger heads, even bigger eyes, etc. Alot like your default x-files alien really.
My theory is that they're just evolved humans studying us just as we are evolved apes studying apes. Jayne Goodall meets Primus from Planet 'x'.
PETA are a bunch of fanatical, hypocritical scumbags who endorse and financially support domestic terrorism.
PETA people are not like that!
PETA people are not like that!
_Jayne_Cobb_ is 100% correct. Look up Animal Liberation Front. PETA has known members of ALF as consultants and speakers. People who have gone to jail for their violent actions. There's been Senete Hearings on this, if I'm not mistaken.
_Jayne_Cobb_ is 100% correct. Look up Animal Liberation Front. PETA has known members of ALF as consultants and speakers. People who have gone to jail for their violent actions. There's been Senete Hearings on this, if I'm not mistaken.
Umm. Did you click the linky? It's a different PETA. ;)
I don't understand how a animal loving vegan, meat=murder kind of person keep 10+ pets emprisoned in a house. Saying that meat is murder and caring for animal rights is your thing, how can you willfully keep an animal, which if left in the wild its whole life, can live a healthly life and fall into THE NATURAL ORDER like it was entended too. But no, they keep them in a house, having to behave properly in order to earn its dinner. If I was an extreme animal lover( I concider a vegan with 10+ animal extreme) I couldn't live with myself to take a feline, a natural born hunter, strip it of all its natural instincts, and domesticate it, keep it in a house all day because if it goes outside it gets fleas or runs away or gets run over. If you're going to stand on the side of animal rights, shouldn't pet owning = slavery?? They have no free will. They are caged and doing the bidding of a master at that point.
Another thing. He called me a murderer because I eat meat. I would love to return to the NATURAL ORDER of things and hunt for my meat and gather for my fruits, but this society doesn't allow for that. Just like this society doesn't allow for someone to have a more free animal policies in suburban areas.
Having removed the option to live in the wild from them, both by removing the wild itself and by breeding their abilities to survive independantly out of them for the sake of making them prettier or more specialized workers, we are now responsible for supporting them. Basically, since we broke them and made them reliant on us, we've bound ourselves to their keeping.
Those pets have no place in the natural order. They are of our making, and are doomed to our keeping.
PETA people are not like that!
Hey, I'm all for that PETA.
Many years ago I pulled digits from a hot waitress cos I made her laugh so hard when she took my order. I asked for a steak, extra rare. When she asked how rare I said "just bring me a cow and an axe". :D
In regards to the original post; just smile cheekily and say "well, technically I'm only an accessory to murder". If you are female you can grin, bat your eyelashes and bob you head from shoulder to shoulder. It works EVERY TIME for me.
lol
"I'm nut a murderer, I'm just disposing of the body."
So is he for eating veggies. They are living beings too, unless he eats dirt.
That is also full of living micro-organism...
The only way to not be a killer is to synthesize all your food from inorganic components
Umm. Did you click the linky? It's a different PETA. ;)
I did not. I just took it at face value. My bad.
Also,
The picture doesn't have any edible plants on it. Unacceptable.
But don't tell me that your lifestyle is better for me. Or that my current lifestyle is inferior to yours.
I don't mind other people being vegans. It's their choice, as is choosing one's religion, sexual preference, political party affiliation, etc.
But don't tell me that your lifestyle is better for me. Or that my current lifestyle is inferior to yours.
Or at least don't push it unless you will back it up with civil war.
:fight!: :fight!: :surrender
I don't mind other people being vegans. It's their choice, as is choosing one's religion, sexual preference, political party affiliation, etc.
But don't tell me that your lifestyle is better for me. Or that my current lifestyle is inferior to yours.
I mind a lot about a person's sick alternative lifestyle. It's offensive and they should not be proud of it. I don't care what you do in your house, just keep it in the house. Think about what kids will ask their parents, and what the parents will have to tell their kids.
....So eat meat in public you sick vegatarians.
(I am kidding. This is a joke. DO NOT take this seriously.)I did not. I just took it at face value. My bad.
No problem. Nobody's perfect. Well, maybe the members of that PETA are. Cuz ya' can't get much closer to perfect than eatin' tasty animals. ;)
Many years ago I pulled digits from a hot waitress cos I made her laugh so hard when she took my order. I asked for a steak, extra rare. When she asked how rare I said "just bring me a cow and an axe". :D
I had the same luck with "lop off it's horns, wipe it's ass and bring me a knife and fork." Although I'm certain the people at the next table weren't that shade of green when they came into the place.
Some people that eat red meat like it to be a little closer to "fresh from the cow". I hate milk, but I'm pushing the lactose crowd's message.
I had the same luck with "lop off it's horns, wipe it's ass and bring me a knife and fork." Although I'm certain the people at the next table weren't that shade of green when they came into the place.
Some people that eat red meat like it to be a little closer to "fresh from the cow". I hate milk, but I'm pushing the lactose crowd's message.
When asked about how rare he wanted his steak, a friend of mine once yelled "I like my meat to MOO when I eat it!"
....So eat meat in public you sick vegatarians.
*looks at pigknight ... thinks "Hawaiian Luau" ... and gets his boar spear*
That said. Owning pets may hold the answer to the energy crisis. I mean...why not own a whole LOT of pets and put them to work turning a big hamster wheel or pulling around a lever attached to a turbine.
I say lazy pets are the problem. We feed them, let them sleep in our homes and provide for them and what do they provide for us in return? The occasional wag of a tail? What's a wag of the tail? I mean gas prices are close to four bucks a gallon puppy! Time to get off your bottom and earn your bloody keep if you ask me...
If pets are slaves then at least teach them a trade or have them do something useful.
Arthnek
That said. Owning pets may hold the answer to the energy crisis. I mean...why not own a whole LOT of pets and put them to work turning a big hamster wheel or pulling around a lever attached to a turbine.
I say lazy pets are the problem. We feed them, let them sleep in our homes and provide for them and what do they provide for us in return? The occasional wag of a tail? What's a wag of the tail? I mean gas prices are close to four bucks a gallon puppy! Time to get off your bottom and earn your bloody keep if you ask me...
If pets are slaves then at least teach them a trade or have them do something useful.
Arthnek
That said. Owning pets may hold the answer to the energy crisis. I mean...why not own a whole LOT of pets and put them to work turning a big hamster wheel or pulling around a lever attached to a turbine.
I say lazy pets are the problem. We feed them, let them sleep in our homes and provide for them and what do they provide for us in return? The occasional wag of a tail? What's a wag of the tail? I mean gas prices are close to four bucks a gallon puppy! Time to get off your bottom and earn your bloody keep if you ask me...
If pets are slaves then at least teach them a trade or have them do something useful.
Arthnek
LMAO if owning pets involves any kind of slavery, then I'm the slave and my cat's the master. We didn't buy our cat - she just wasn't happy wherever she was living and decided to move herself in. She was timid at first, sitting outside of the back door, or looking in the kitchen window. Then she was sitting inside the kitchen door, then in the middle of the kitchen, then by the chair, then on the chair, and so on. Now if she wants my chair I have to get up and let her have it. If she wants food she'll pester me until I get up and fetch it. But... I wouldn't have it any other way. I love that wierd little furry thing.
If owning an animal is slavery, then owning a non-sterilized, non-declawning outdoor cat is the sole exception to this rule. Why? Because unlike other domesticated animals, the cat is the only self-domesticated animal. Unlike the other animals who were taken young and raised specifically to live among human, the cat naturally came in the human environment and adapted himself to this environment. In other word, human environment is the natural cat environment (they «choose» this environment to survived).
But don't felt ashame if you have any other knind of animals; the crime was done a long time ago and we can't just let any dogs or whatever go back in the wilderness because the vast majority jhust won't survive.
I say lazy pets are the problem. We feed them, let them sleep in our homes and provide for them and what do they provide for us in return? The occasional wag of a tail? What's a wag of the tail?
The equivalent of a baby passing gas and smiling? :evillaugh
But between me and you ... babies are butt-ugly, especially the human ones.
It takes all of my strength not to barf in the presence of one.
If owning an animal is slavery, then owning a non-sterilized, non-declawning outdoor cat is the sole exception to this rule. Why? Because unlike other domesticated animals, the cat is the only self-domesticated animal.
Oh, yeah. They're very domesticated. They're nothing more than a tiny, furry version of a 30-year-old slacker roommate who is unemployed, parked his behind in front of his game console, and occasionally licked himself of leftover Chee-tos crumb. Can't get him to fetch the morning newspaper. :rolleye2:
I swear all cats should be neutered/spayed to prevent future breeding ... ALL CATS.
I'm the one who has to work, be responsible, and listen to other people's ****..
Worst thing my dogs have to worry about is fleas. Oh wow they're itchy.. Hell, I go through that do cause I have a really dry scalp.. But otherwise they get to sleep all day, what a horrible life!
That's why I encourage meat consumption. Cause those animals live damn good lives sleeping and screwing eachother all day. You God-damn right I'm going to chew on those spoiled animals!
The only good argument for compulsory veganism is one that the vegan crowd isn't smart enough to use.. and that's if meat production was banned or atleast more strictly regulated.. there would be more wheat and corn. For every pound of beef that's like five pounds of wheat/corn.
This could not only end hunger around the world, but solve our energy crisis. And who doesn't want to end world hunger? Well.. I don't.. I kind of like knowing people suffer.. but I certainly want to pay less at the gas-pump!
So in that regard, compulsory vegasnism is in my rational self interest. Cheaper gas>the freedom to eat meat.
The problem is vegans will never stress that point becuase vegans are retarded.
That's why I encourage meat consumption. Cause those animals live damn good lives sleeping and screwing eachother all day. You God-damn right I'm going to chew on those spoiled animals!
Animals? I thought you and your kinds suck human brains. :P
Animals? I thought you and your kinds suck human brains. :P
On a related note, if anybody is curious. Humans taste like pork when they're cooked.
You don't want to know how I know that..
On a related note, if anybody is curious. Humans taste like pork when they're cooked.
You don't want to know how I know that..
Burnt your finger, eh? ;)
Tell your friend you are a second-hand vegetarian; you only eat animals that eat vegetables. That at least should buy you enough time to finish your cheeseburger, while they sort it out. :D
:heehee
I'll have to see if that works. Might even drop the fact that they are animals that only eat plant-stuff.
I don't think it is. The slavery is when one human owns another human. I suppose you could extend this concept to included beasts of burden, because we buy them to do work for us. But pets are different. Pets give and receive affection. They don't have any responsibilities, except maybe for occassionally hunting dogs or cats that hunt mice (but lets be honest they would be doing that anyway).
Only if I don't feed my cat any supermarket pet food.
What if you named the dog "Slave?"
Would never named him that. First of all, it's a dog, not a human.