any vegetarians / vegans around? :) (Pic)

[kamaleon]

Hi folks

I was just wondering if there were any vegetarians or vegans around on this board

Feel free to drop by and say hi if so

If not... you can always say hi too

[gator]

I am a vegetarian (am from India), have been one forever ... I enjoy the looks on the faces of the guys at Wendy's when I say "medium fries and one junior cheeseburger deluxe, no burger patty please"

[kamaleon]

Nice to hear that Gator!

I am one myself, have been a vegetarian since 11 years ago of which the last 8 and a half I've been a vegan

Where exactly are you from in India?

[Kyocera]

no burger patty please

Can't you order something like a soyburger or something at any of the fast food places? There used to be a place in california where we could get those, they were a quarter each and definately got rid of the munchies.

[tylerwylie]

Vegetarian? Ugh! Give me my beef, chicken, and fish!




By the way those of you who are vegetarian, are you vegetarian for moral reasons, health reasons, or both.

[gator]

Where exactly are you from in India?

I am from southern part if India - Madras (or chennai as it is now called) is my home town.

Mike, the only place that will sell a sandwich with a soyburger here is subway ... none of the other fast food places here have vegetarian stuff (except maybe french fries - and some place make that with lard!). I sometimes eat mexican food (substituing cheicken/beef with black beans + rice) but it gets boring real quick. Certain mediterranean food items are great (mmm ... hummmus...) as well, but again, when you dont eat meat, you dont have too much choice. I can cook very very well though, so I mostly eat at home. I read somewhere that probably the easiest way to a woman's heart is through her stomach , haven't had the chance to test that though!

By the way those of you who are vegetarian, are you vegetarian for moral reasons, health reasons, or both.

Niether - it is because of habit!

I have nothing against eating meat as such - meaning I don't consider it is immoral/unethical. We are born omnivores and if you want to eat meat, why not is my policy.

But then, when you are used to eating vegetarian food from the day you started eating (due to religious reasons in family and culture) and having been kind of conditioned to think (for lack of a better phrase) that non-vegetarian food is "bad", you cannot change habit of 25 years in the flash of an eyelid, though your brain says there is nothing wrong with changing. I had a hard time when I came to the US, I literally could not stand the smell in any of the fast food places, let alone sight. Now I am very used to both sight and smell, but I cannot make myself eat meat/eggs. I wish I could, but I know that I won't - its hard to explain. I hope what I wrote makes sense.

I have come to realize that our likes/dislikes in food is a ptretty big part of who we are ... obviously likes/dislikes can change, but only if you give a chance for change. A lifetime of habit is a very strong factor against this, and all we can do is atleast try ... sometimes we are so biased that we don't even try, and that makes me think a lot.

[ajkula66]

Sri, you need to leave Florida and come to New York, there are Indian restaurants on every corner...

As for getting to the woman's heart by cooking, I can tell you that it can play a great role (especially combined with good wine and music) but all of the recepies that I've used throughout the years would include stuff that you wouldn't touch so...you're on your own, buddy...

God bless all of you people, I know I would be hungry...having had many vegetarian and vegan friends in the past and trying out different foods...I wouldn't be able to do it, even if my life depended on it. Seriously.

I'm going to hit the hay now, and dream of three little pigs...slowly roasting on an open fire...yum...

[skitty4gzus]

isnt it, the quickest way to man's heart is through his stomach? anyways, to each his own on what he eats. i have heard of some pretty crazy reasons why to or why not to eat certain foods. habit though is very understandable. i eat chicken fingers with mayonnaise, it is purely by habit and everybody thinks im weird. there are times where i fast meat, sweets, breads, etc...... sometimes all foods. i love meats, poultry, seafood, dairy, but to each his own!

[tylerwylie]

By the way those of you who are vegetarian, are you vegetarian for moral reasons, health reasons, or both.

Niether - it is because of habit!

I have nothing against eating meat as such - meaning I don't consider it is immoral/unethical. We are born omnivores and if you want to eat meat, why not is my policy.

But then, when you are used to eating vegetarian food from the day you started eating (due to religious reasons in family and culture) and having been kind of conditioned to think (for lack of a better phrase) that non-vegetarian food is "bad", you cannot change habit of 25 years in the flash of an eyelid, though your brain says there is nothing wrong with changing. I had a hard time when I came to the US, I literally could not stand the smell in any of the fast food places, let alone sight. Now I am very used to both sight and smell, but I cannot make myself eat meat/eggs. I wish I could, but I know that I won't - its hard to explain. I hope what I wrote makes sense.

I have come to realize that our likes/dislikes in food is a ptretty big part of who we are ... obviously likes/dislikes can change, but only if you give a chance for change. A lifetime of habit is a very strong factor against this, and all we can do is atleast try ... sometimes we are so biased that we don't even try, and that makes me think a lot.

Finally a respectable answer to being a vegetarian.

[kamaleon]

By the way those of you who are vegetarian, are you vegetarian for moral reasons, health reasons, or both.

I'm vegan exclusively for moral / ethical reasons. But I obviously am very happy that it turns out to be a very healthy choice, too

Finally a respectable answer to being a vegetarian.

I beg your pardon?

[tylerwylie]

Do you object to killing animals, or the manner in that they are killed? Or both, also what do you consider as the health benefits of a vegetarian/vegan diet?

[kamaleon]

Well, since you ask, yes, I object to the killing of sentient beings as well as the way they are treated. Whether they belong to the human species or not, that seems completely irrelevant to me

A sentient being is a sentient being, that alone should be taken into account. Because I have been raised and educated to not cause harm to my felow human beings, I do not see any plausible reason why I should not enlarge that to other individuals who do not belong to the same species that I do, but who share similar characteristics (being, obviously, the ability to experience pain and pleasure, to put it simple).

In what regards the possible health benefits of vegetarian / vegan diets, I wouldn't probably be the best person to ask, but I can suggest you the reading of the official position of the American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada on the subject.

http://www.eatright.org/cps/rde/xchg/ad ... U_HTML.htm

[kamaleon]

Gator, I understand that there's plenty of nice, lush vegan treats in the US! The same isn't true for where I am right now though (France)

I do mostly eat at home too, because I can, and I can't afford to spend much money going out. Even if I did, I don't reckon I would go anywhere really, not in the city I live in. There's only a place that makes falafel and there's 2 vegetarian restaurants but I'm not into french vegetarian "cuisine". Too expensive, and not wholesome. Plus, it isn't usually vegan.

When I go back to my homeland - Portugal - I do treat myself to many delicious meals at the various vegetarian / vegan / macrobiotic restaurants I know of there.

My partner just cooked me this surprising meal for lunch



MOD EDIT: Picture warning added.

[syedj]

We have many friends that are vegetarian (and yes, they are from South-East India (your homies Sri!)) and whenever they are over we have to be careful to have at least one or two vegetarian dishes around. Luckily, most of them don't object to eggs to its easier to serve them. Whenever they are invited, out of respect we try to keep our cooking utensils and pots and pans separate between meat and vegetarian dishes. Its funny how sometimes in the same family one spouse would be strictly vegetarian (not even eggs and mushrooms are allowed) while the other will eat anything and everything that is remotely edible regardless of the source. Then there is another kind who can eat chicken but no beef or pork. I have another close friend who doesn't eat vegetables that are roots and grow under the ground (e.g. carrots, onions and etc).

I don't eat pork.

[kamaleon]

Hi syedj

That's very considerate that you do not mix utensils and pots, I know that's something that really troubles me should I eat some meal over at someone's place where that person cooks meat or animal produce.

That's funny that you should say that some of your friends don't eat mushrooms. I know some people that don't, but that's because of their beliefs in some spiritual / esoteric currents, and it's not in connection to vegetarianism. Mushrooms, as well as any other fungi, though not part of the plant kingdom, are obviously vegetarian food.

I too know of people that eat white meat (chicken, turkey, duck, etc) but not red meat. Those people are obviously not vegetarian

[gmgfarrand]

A little late in the game, but I am a pescatarian.

Basically, no meat, just fish, and since I have always been finicky (pain in the [censored]) just fish & Chips.

My mother was a horrible cook when I was growing up, so whatever meat dish she made, wasn't really worth eating.

Then I joined the US Navy, it wasn't much better there.

I went to alot of countries, read a few books, saw a few things, and swore off meat.

I do miss my Whoppers, Crunchwraps, Black Angus Fajitas and what not, but it's been about 3 years with no slip-ups.

Now if I can just eliminate soda 100%.....

[whizkid]

A friend of mine won't eat red meat, but that's because he had a summer job working with the industrial controllers at an industrial-sized butcher. Very understandable.

As for me, I don't eat predators, but I've never had to try hard to avoid lion, falcon or wolf at the grocery store.

[BeeJayEmm]

I'm not a vegetarian, although I try to get my 5 servings a day . I have friends who run the gamut from fish only to ovo/lacto to vegetarian to vegan. They seem to be happy with their respective choices, so more power to them.

However, to say that one will not, for moral/ethical reasons, eat living things which one considers to be closer to one's own species, yet will eat living things which are considered farther away, seems inconsistent, at least. How do we know definitively which are the sentient beings?

What do you have against vegetables?

[ArtShapiro]

I am from southern part if India - Madras (or chennai as it is now called) is my home town.

I'm curious why a lot of the better-known - and probably lesser-known - Indian cities have been renamed in recent years.

Art (purely carnivorous - a good lamb vindaloo is hard to beat)

[beGi]

Well, I think I would starve to death if become vegan, not because it has bad taste, it's because I just get hungry after 20min, but yes, it is likely to be a habbit...

I just eat it all, alive and dead, with roots or leafs, 2 or 4 or 8 legs, fish, seashells (crazy for that little things), octopus, squids, sepia, crabs, lambs, pork, veal, snails (yes, snails), you name it, I'll prepare it and eat it, with olive oil and fine wine of course.... I just LOVE mediterrannian cuisine, but i might be little subjective, but I've tried a lot of them. I just love to experiment with food... And it doesn't get much healthy than mediterrannian cuisine (only Japanese cuisine can compete with it)....

But if you ask me what is main ingredient for good meal, it just HAS to be fresh (in 85% cases), if it was frozen, forget about good taste. And if we are talking about fish, not only it has to be fresh (and alive if possible) it just has to be bred in wild...

After I've said this, I just got very home sick, but in a week I'll be on my home island ....And summer is here

One more thing:

I'm vegan exclusively for moral/ethical reasons....

Be sure that you don't have any leather clothing/anything when you claim something like that... There's good analogy for that Scratch an altruist, and you'll see hypocrite bleeding....


Cheers...

[kamaleon]

This intended to be a post asking if there were any vegans or vegetarians around, to all the others, I thank you but I didn't ask if there were meat-eaters around, so I really don't see why people feel the urge to come and tell everything about all the animals or parts of animals they eat.

So if you can please respect that, I'm happy to go on, otherwise, I'll just ask a moderator to lock this thread.

Thank you.

[kamaleon]

However, to say that one will not, for moral/ethical reasons, eat living things which one considers to be closer to one's own species, yet will eat living things which are considered farther away, seems inconsistent, at least. How do we know definitively which are the sentient beings?

That could be a good question but unfortunatly I think it's just about a bit short of being it indeed.

My position is not of not eating living things which are closer to my species. Those are your words. Furthermore, can you define "closer"? To which extent? Comparing to what?

My position consists of not eating sentient beings, period. And not eating beings which we are not sure they are sentient or not, it's the benefit of the doubt principle.
Beings like insects, and many other members of the animal kingdom, we don't know if they are sentient or not. I choose to avoid killing them (at least for food, medicine, clothing, etc) as much as possible.

There are at least 3 indicators of the capacity for sentience in a given being:

- the presence of a nervous system of some sort (central, peripheral, ganglionic, whatever). It has to be functional, though.

- external signs of behaviour (reaction to aggression towards its bodily tissues, etc)

- an adaptive value in darwinian / evolutionary terms. Beings that can move, for instances, have had the interest of developing sentience throughout their history as that would allow them to try to avoid danger; plants on the other hand, can be said to not have had the interest to develop the capacity to feel pain, as they cannot duck or move to prevent the source of pain. In evolutionary terms, it is not interesting for an organism to feel pain ad infinitum without being able to do much about it.

To answer you question, it is not possible, at the light of current science, to establish with precision where sentience begins and where it ends, and I'm not the right person to talk about as I have limited knowledge on the matter, but one think is for sure, there are a lot of beings that can accuratly be said to be sentient. Starting off from mamals and going down to birds, fish, most vertebrae, some invertebrae (octopus, for instances), one has a lot of evidence. Regarding others, it's very fuzzy.

What do you have against vegetables?

Nothing. In moral terms, I don't think it's very interesting to relate to vegetables as living beings that one can have something for or against. They just don't have interests.

[kamaleon]

Be sure that you don't have any leather clothing/anything when you claim something like that... There's good analogy for that Scratch an altruist, and you'll see hypocrite bleeding....


Cheers...

Veganism is not about perfection or being pure. It's a practical attempt at not using animals or by-products, to a certain extent. It is impossible to be 100% vegan, as I cannot levitate to prevent from stamping onto little creatures, I cannot produce my own food within my cells to prevent interfering with other animals that live on the grass, plants I eat, etc. I live in a town, I use computers, I take the bus, I use many things that have contributed in some way or another towards creating suffering somewhere. Still I call myself a vegan for practical and political reasons.

If you think you can tackle a serious moral problem by saying that those you feel concerned by it are just hypocrits, I think there is a problem in your attitude.

Cheers,

kamaleon.

[ajkula66]

kamaleon wrote:

I don't think it's very interesting to relate to vegetables as living beings that one can have something for or against. They just don't have interests.

And what type of data are you basing this statement on?

[kamaleon]

Read above, I mentioned the indicators of the capacity for sentience.

edit:

If you follow my reasoning, it becomes clear that plants lack this capacity.

In fact, I adhere to the position that sees sentience as the most basic characteristic that would make a being have interests of some sort.

If we are to understand that if a being has the capacity to feel pain (a manifestation of sentience), that's because biologically that capacity can help him protect its body, its tissues. Therefore, because pain is an unpleasent experience (apart obviously, in cases when you wish to experience pain as that would cause you pleasure), it seems clear to me that a being that can feel it, has the interest of preventing the source of pain. In other words, a being that has sentience, always has an interest of some kind (in this case, being the interest of not experience pain), and having interests always stems from having the capacity for sentience.

[ajkula66]

I suggest reading some Huxley and possibly re-evaluating the statements above...plants do feel pain...or at least he made quite a strong argument that they do IMHO...

[kamaleon]

Plants do not feel pain...

If you care to explain that strong argument he made I would be interested.

[Rob Mayercik]

What do you have against vegetables?

Nothing. In moral terms, I don't think it's very interesting to relate to vegetables as living beings that one can have something for or against. They just don't have interests.

At the risk of injecting a bit of humor into this, I'd ask that we recall Arthur Dent's conversation with The Dish of the Day in "The Restaurant At the End of The Universe" regarding salads and meat animals.

Not that I ascribe to the theory that plants are sentient or capable of sensing pain, but two things come to mind:

1. The current lack of evidence to support this thinking does not constitute evidence to the contrary.

2. By our standards, perhaps this view of plants is correct, but are our standards necessarily accurate or correct?

Rob

[kamaleon]

Not that I ascribe to the theory that plants are sentient or capable of sensing pain, but two things come to mind:

1. The current lack of evidence to support this thinking does not constitute evidence to the contrary.

Well... there is evidence that sentience is definetly depending on the presence of a nervous system. If plants don't have a nervous system, then I think that's pretty much evidence that they can't feel pain. If you can, you can go on about re-inventing the definition of a nervous system, etc... you can apply the same reasoning to millions of other subjects. Absolute relativism has its limits.

2. By our standards, perhaps this view of plants is correct, but are our standards necessarily accurate or correct?

Rob

Maybe not, science does not pretend to have the ultimate truth. The scientific paradigm can evolve and stand corrected. Still I don't think that in itself is an argument against science. Anyway, you mentioned "our standards". Do you have anything particular in mind when saying that? In other words, do you relate to "other" standards rather than "ours"? As somehow the expression "our" standards implies that there might be "others"? Anyway, I'm curious in knowing what.

Anyway, the question of plant sentience is obviously interesting, but in moral terms, and according to what we know of plants, it adds little to an attempt of creating a better world for those that we do know are sentient.

There is major evidence that many animals are sentient, have an inner mental life of their own, can feel pain, thus can have concerns, interests, preferences. Humans should have moral obligations towards those beings, as much as they have moral obligations towards other humans.

On the other hand, there is no evidence whatsoever that plants can feel pain, or can have mental states and conscious activity; therefore I don't see a case for thinking that plants can be said to have interests, concerns, or preferences.

Actually, even if they did so (which they don't, but let's assume so for a split second) there would still be a major argument for preferring to eat plants rather than (most) animals: the fact that by eating plants, directly, you would still be (in most cases) consuming less plants than if you were to consume animals (flesh, or by-products) that feed on plants. Get the picture? Figure out a food pyramid with plants at the bottom, then herbivores, then predators: there is a major loss of calories as you go up the pyramid. As a matter of fact, and according to widespread litterature, including the FAO, one can realise that animals that are used for their meat, dairy, or whatever, can use up to 80 or 90% of the original intake of protein / calories they are fed with in their bodily functions (heat dissipation, renewal of cells, perspiration, defecation, etc, etc, etc). Thus, depending on the species, breed, and individual, you can use anything from 3 to 10 times (and maybe even more!) the amount of proteins in vegetable form to feed the animal than you will obtain from its meat, eggs or dairy.

I think that for those that are indeed and genuinely concerned about plant welfare (which is seldom the case, mostly the pseudo argument of plant sentience is just used for mockery or insult) should still consider the fact that when you eat plants only one eats less plants than when one eats plants + animals. The evidence is striking. Either that, or commit suicide.

[ajkula66]

kameleon wrote:

If you care to explain that strong argument he made I would be interested.

How about doing a little research and reading on your own?