Veganism

[Yunki 2197]

3 minutes ago, Beerman said:

As long as the animals don't suffer in death in fine with it. I try the best I can to go out of my way to support places that care for animals before the slaughter. I care more about myself than an certain animals lives. A cow being one of them, but that doesn't mean I want to cause unneeded suffering before their death or in life. 

 

Eat meat. It's fucking tasty. 

When you say you don't want the animal to suffer, I assume you are talking about a humane slaughter. How would a humane slaughter look to you?

It's not wrong to care for yourself more than other animals, however, that isn't a justification to demand the slaughtering of animals. You can care about yourself and not have animals involved at all; I showed above how eating plant-based provides you a healthy and adequate diet AND can decrease the risk of heart disease, certain cancers, high cholesterol, and other preventable diseases. 

Lastly, you say you don't want to cause unneeded suffering before their death or during their life, yet practically all animals we consume suffer during their life and the slaughtering process, local farms are guilty of this too.

[The Ben 187]

Hunting Elephants is illegal 

[Dakota 4722]

You literally just said you're going to have a farm with chickens. My dad grew up on such a farm. They raised chickens. One has to die. Boom straight to the dome. Liveda healthy life and was played with by him and my 3 uncles. It lived a good life and you can't argue that. With shifting practices, we can change how we cultivate meat. The current practices are inhumane.

 

There aren't any good moral arguments for eating meat. Okay. Me eating meat is immoral and I love it. It's amazing. My butcher gets me hella good cuts and I roast that bitch and I love it. It's the benefit of being at the top of the food chain. 

 

Humane slaughter means they are domed in the field. Not lured into a shack. Locked in place and some machine, stressed out, then bolted to death. That's no better than an electric chair. 

[Rootbeer 1293]

37 minutes ago, Yunki said:

 I truly believe you cannot ever get milk without their species to suffer. The milk is made for the newborn, just like any other mammal. By giving us humans milk, we are taking away not only the nutritional substance that will be used to help a cow become healthy, we take them away from bonding. Just like humans, cows have been observed to be maternal creatures. You put stress on the mother and the calf by separating them and not allowing her to feed her child. 

In regards to an animal living the good life, at the end of the day, they are on that farm to make money for the farmers. They are being exploited for financial gain against their will. Furthermore, having shitty conditions is how most farms are operated, local or not.

But the matter of the fact is, a dairy farmer is going to send a male calf to the slaughterhouse for veal, and the female calf will have to go through the same hardships that her mother went through

Let's look at this logically. I believe your premise is "All farms are bad for animals," with the arguments that 1) farmers can be shitty and 2) we're enslaving these animals so we can gain from them.

1) Again, we all can agree on the need for shitty farms and farmers to go die. Going to the extremes and saying there are no good farms would be like saying we should stop all fostercare programs because some foster parents are really shitty.

2) I get that the last part is entirely against the philosophy and that's completely fair. The reasoning is a bit circular though: it's wrong because I think it's wrong and here's my philosophy to back me up. I think what we need to separate is your average farmer just livin his life versus a cattle farm of 1000+ cows standing in stalls. You immediately assumed here about cows:

1 hour ago, Yunki said:

The milk is made for the newborn, just like any other mammal. By giving us humans milk, we are taking away not only the nutritional substance that will be used to help a cow become healthy, we take them away from bonding. Just like humans, cows have been observed to be maternal creatures. You put stress on the mother and the calf by separating them and not allowing her to feed her child.

I never said anything about removing calves from their mothers when I asked about Betsy above, nor that Mac is even profiting from the animals. Would you be okay with farms if old Mac bred his cows with a proper bull and let the calves chill with their mothers? You see the latter all the time if you ever drive past farms in the Midwest. I think it's entirely possible for a farmer to live in a non-suffering, harmonious way with his livestock without sending his cattle to the slaughterhouse. As for the industrial sized cattle farms, that's much easier to understand your concerns about. Logistically speaking, these farms currently make sense in a profitable way but it's also the lazier way that has more suffering. Imagine for a sec if Betsy's farmer increased the size of his farm 100 fold but doesn't change the way he caringly handles them, mabey even hired some farmhands to help take care of each cow and animal. Each cow livin the good life in pastures feeding its calves, getting its excess milk bottled, chickens being taken care of properly, etc of what you'd see in a good farm, except on a larger scale. It's pricer, less efficient, and requires more work than the current alternative but the suffering is much much less if not completely nullified. Would this larger industrial-sized farm be more idealized, suffering-wise? If this is how all largescale farms were, would you still have any qualms about farms in general?

Of course farms are going to look evil when you view them as enslaving the animals. I just think that besides killing the animal to be consumed and eating eggs, there can't be any logical arguments against a "good" farmer to be morally wrong when he lives harmoniously with his animals.

 

Also, sorta off-topic but

9 minutes ago, Yunki said:

As predator X hunts and kills prey Y, prey Y population decreases, when prey Y population decreases, predator X begins to die off from starvation, because of a lower population in predator X, prey Y population increases, so on so forth. In those cases, it is not okay to disrupt that cycle. Also, I strongly believe that ending any species life early, even if every single component of the body was used, is cruel. 

The yellow "crazy" ants are a species introduced an isolated island by people. They usually chill in their own territory which crosses paths with a pretty popular phenomenomnoms known as the March of the red crabs. Christmas Island red crabs migrate to the sea to breed and many enter the ants' territory. The ants are crazy OP: they piss acid and swarm anything that they think is attacking them and the crabs are completely defenseless against this. Would it be right to exterminate the ants and take their millions of lives, even though "we" put them there?

[Yunki 2197]

6 minutes ago, Beerman said:

You literally just said you're going to have a farm with chickens. My dad grew up on such a farm. They raised chickens. One has to die. Boom straight to the dome. Liveda healthy life and was played with by him and my 3 uncles. It lived a good life and you can't argue that. With shifting practices, we can change how we cultivate meat. The current practices are inhumane.

 

There aren't any good moral arguments for eating meat. Okay. Me eating meat is immoral and I love it. It's amazing. My butcher gets me hella good cuts and I roast that bitch and I love it. It's the benefit of being at the top of the food chain. 

 

Humane slaughter means they are domed in the field. Not lured into a shack. Locked in place and some machine, stressed out, then bolted to death. That's no better than an electric chair. 

I never said I would have a farm, I would have a sanctuary. A sanctuary is miles different from a farm. Sanctuary's do not breed animals, they rescue animals. They also do not sell the products that are produced by the animals. They also do not kill the animals (unless they are suffering from a chronic disease, I would assume). 

 

On the topic of humane slaughter, I find it as an oxymoron. Humane objectively means - having or showing compassion or benevolence. The reason I call it an oxymoron is because I find it impossible to compassionately kill something that does not want to be killed.

 

I appreciate that you're able to realize that there are not any moral arguments for eating meat nowadays, I feel most people cannot get over that hurdle. Like I told Karma, I love the taste of meat, to me, it tastes amazing. However, what I told a few other people of this thread, are your taste buds and those 15 minutes of pleasure worth more than the only life an animal gets. We established that morally it is not okay to do it. Reasoning that it's okay to do it by saying we are at the top of the food chain is inaccurate.

 

The food chain refers to the natural order and maintenance of a healthy population of animals and the ecology. What we do to animals is far from natural and really doesn't have anything to do with a food chain. The food chain argument boils down to the point that humans are intellectually smarter than every other species, but as I said in the original post, being smarter doesn't justify killing other species. The animals we kill are smart enough and have the capacity to feel emotions, pain, suffering.

[Yunki 2197]

27 minutes ago, Rootbeer said:

Let's look at this logically. I believe your premise is "All farms are bad for animals," with the arguments that 1) farmers can be shitty and 2) we're enslaving these animals so we can gain from them.

1) Again, we all can agree on the need for shitty farms and farmers to go die. Going to the extremes and saying there are no good farms would be like saying we should stop all fostercare programs because some foster parents are really shitty.

2) I get that the last part is entirely against the philosophy and that's completely fair. The reasoning is a bit circular though: it's wrong because I think it's wrong and here's my philosophy to back me up. I think what we need to separate is your average farmer just livin his life versus a cattle farm of 1000+ cows standing in stalls. You immediately assumed here about cows:

I never said anything about removing calves from their mothers when I asked about Betsy above, nor that Mac is even profiting from the animals. Would you be okay with farms if old Mac bred his cows with a proper bull and let the calves chill with their mothers? You see the latter all the time if you ever drive past farms in the Midwest. I think it's entirely possible for a farmer to live in a non-suffering, harmonious way with his livestock without sending his cattle to the slaughterhouse. As for the industrial sized cattle farms, that's much easier to understand your concerns about. Logistically speaking, these farms currently make sense in a profitable way but it's also the lazier way that has more suffering. Imagine for a sec if Betsy's farmer increased the size of his farm 100 fold but doesn't change the way he caringly handles them, mabey even hired some farmhands to help take care of each cow and animal. Each cow livin the good life in pastures feeding its calves, getting its excess milk bottled, chickens being taken care of properly, etc of what you'd see in a good farm, except on a larger scale. It's pricer, less efficient, and requires more work than the current alternative but the suffering is much much less if not completely nullified. Would this larger industrial-sized farm be more idealized, suffering-wise? If this is how all largescale farms were, would you still have any qualms about farms in general?

Of course farms are going to look evil when you view them as enslaving the animals. I just think that besides killing the animal to be consumed and eating eggs, there can't be any logical arguments against a "good" farmer to be morally wrong when he lives harmoniously with his animals.

 

Also, sorta off-topic but

The yellow "crazy" ants are a species introduced an isolated island by people. They usually chill in their own territory which crosses paths with a pretty popular phenomenomnoms known as the March of the red crabs. Christmas Island red crabs migrate to the sea to breed and many enter the ants' territory. The ants are crazy OP: they piss acid and swarm anything that they think is attacking them and the crabs are completely defenseless against this. Would it be right to exterminate the ants and take their millions of lives, even though "we" put them there?

1. I really don't believe it's extreme to say most, if not all farms are bad. Farms are maintained and run by profit, and ultimately every animal there dies an early death. The standard practice for meat and dairy are abhorrent.  

2. I don't think it's circular. I think exploitation of animals is wrong because they gain little to nothing for pleasing our taste. They have no say in what to do and because of that, I find it wrong. Bees are no exception to this exploitation. Also, the average farmer just living his life gets to live his life while the cattle he raises gets ultimately shipped off to a slaughterhouse. The farmer itself can give the cow a great life, but once the cow stops producing milk, the farmer ships her off to be slaughtered. To add on, local farmers are just as susceptible to cruel treatment of animals.  

I posted his stuff a lot, but I find his videos great. It's a short video showing one of the dairy farms in the UK. 

 

In all, even if the farmer gives the dairy cow a great life, her calf will be taken away (This is what happens, the farmers don't want the calf to drink the milk made for them), if she gives birth to a male, he will be separated and killed at young age for veal, and if it is a female, the calf will be separated from its mother and eventually begin her life as a dairy cow. When the mother becomes unable to produce milk, she will then be slaughtered.

 

In your hypothetical, if the female was not forcefully inseminated, the calves never been separated, the males don't get slaughtered for veal, the calves get priority for the milk (I don't know how we would know what excess or not tbh), and the cows are never sent to a slaughterhouse. Then sure you can begin to make an argument that this is cruelty-free. Just let me know when you can find that. 

 

Also, I think we can both agree that a large majority (I would guess at least 75%) of dairy production is done in some of the worse ways legally possible. You can find ol' Mac, and kudos to him, but the majority of dairy farms are not that. There is no money in that process. At that point, I don't know why Mac just doesn't grow crops and non-dairy milk. 

 

On your off-topic scenario -- I don't think there's a right answer, but I would have to lean more towards eliminating the foreign species.

 

 

EDIT: To address your anecdote about seeing cows with their calf. I am just speculating, but I would assume those cows have stopped producing milk so there is no financial risk for the mother and calf to be together.

[BananaPeelz 709]

14 hours ago, Yunki said:

Obviously, it's hard to replace an entire chicken, but I have found truly amazing substitutes for some of my favorite chicken snacks/meals. There's a brand called gardein that has amazing orange "chickin" and chipotle lime "chickin". I had my non-vegan GF try the orange chickin and she loves it. With that being said I DO NOT recommend buying their beef substitutes, have not found a good one yet.

 

But again, thank you for taking the time to read  

Yo check out the Beyond Burger by the company Beyond Meat. It's pretty damn expensive but it's the best tasting beef substitute that I've found so far, and it's not made from soy like every other subsitute.

 

Another aspect of veganism that I haven't seen mentioned here yet is the environmentalism aspect. Raising animals for consumption is an incredibly resource-intensive process (animals need to be fed several pounds of plants to produce just one pound of meat) and is a leading cause of deforestation around the world. There's also the disruption to the various ecological cycles (carbon, nitrogen, etc.) that comes with clearing huge tracts of forest land for agricultural production and applying all the additional fertilizers and pesticides that are required by farmers to grow the crops that just end up being used as animal feed. Pollution from farms is also a pretty huge issue. Not only are there more pesticides and fertilizers ending up in our waterways, but animal waste can be a huge problem, especially in factory farms which can produce as much sewage waste as a small city. 

[Bluestreakid15 540]

Why is there a megathread about veganism? Like what? 

[Yunki 2197]

10 minutes ago, BananaPeelz said:

Yo check out the Beyond Burger by the company Beyond Meat. It's pretty damn expensive but it's the best tasting beef substitute that I've found so far, and it's not made from soy like every other subsitute.

 

Another aspect of veganism that I haven't seen mentioned here yet is the environmentalism aspect. Raising animals for consumption is an incredibly resource-intensive process (animals need to be fed several pounds of plants to produce just one pound of meat) and is a leading cause of deforestation around the world. There's also the disruption to the various ecological cycles (carbon, nitrogen, etc.) that comes with clearing huge tracts of forest land for agricultural production and applying all the additional fertilizers and pesticides that are required by farmers to grow the crops that just end up being used as animal feed. Pollution from farms is also a pretty huge issue. Not only are there more pesticides and fertilizers ending up in our waterways, but animal waste can be a huge problem, especially in factory farms which can produce as much sewage waste as a small city. 

I've heard great things about the beyond burger, have yet to try it though. I'm only scared because I heard its incredibly unhealthy for you and I'm afraid I might feel sick afterward, but yolo I guess.

 

You bring up great environmental points, I talked about in discord and because of laziness, I didn't bring it up here. Thank you for sharing and saving me the time of doing it myself

 

 

[trav 6834]

 

What's your prediction for when humans are comfortable eating human meat before this bacterial species (humans) destroys the whole planet?

• 50 years
• 200 years
• 500 years
• ??? years

[camelFun 1435]

19 minutes ago, Travesty said:

 

What's your prediction for when humans are comfortable eating human meat before this bacterial species (humans) destroys the whole planet?

• 50 years
• 200 years
• 500 years
• ??? years

Can we have an official poll pls? Digest worthy.

[BananaPeelz 709]

35 minutes ago, Yunki said:

I've heard great things about the beyond burger, have yet to try it though. I'm only scared because I heard its incredibly unhealthy for you and I'm afraid I might feel sick afterward, but yolo I guess.

 

You bring up great environmental points, I talked about in discord and because of laziness, I didn't bring it up here. Thank you for sharing and saving me the time of doing it myself

 

 

I wouldn't say they're really unhealthy for you. They're definitely not the best nutritionally (high fat and sodium) but it's mostly all unsaturated fats and the sodium isn't too ridiculous (there's like more than twice as much in a pack of ramen). You most definitely shouldn't be eating them frequently, but I think they're pretty fuego so I splurge and cook one up occasionally, especially if I'm at a BBQ with friends. They've never made me or any of my other veggie/vegan friends sick, but I won't definitively claim they won't make you feel sick since everyone's different.

[Yunki 2197]

Just now, BananaPeelz said:

I wouldn't say they're really unhealthy for you. They're definitely not the best nutritionally (high fat and sodium) but it's mostly all unsaturated fats and the sodium isn't too ridiculous (there's like more than twice as much in a pack of ramen). You most definitely shouldn't be eating them frequently, but I think they're pretty fuego so I splurge and cook one up occasionally, especially if I'm at a BBQ with friends. They've never made me or any of my other veggie/vegan friends sick, but I won't definitively claim they won't make you feel sick since everyone's different.

That's good to hear, I just remember one of my friends talking about how the cholesterol was incredibly high and so was the saturated fat, ill check it out though.

[Rootbeer 1293]

1 hour ago, Yunki said:

I really don't believe it's extreme to say most, if not all farms are bad.

... Then sure you can begin to make an argument that this is cruelty-free.

Contradict, but it seems like we're narrowing down the issue. We're moving the conclusion from "farms are bad because shitty farmers exist" to "shitty farming practices are bad because they actually do harm animals". The former splits vegans from non-vegans because while it has a good argument, the conclusion it draws is a little shaky (shitty foresting hurts the environment so ALL foresting needs to go). The latter conclusion unites the two towards a cause that can do good. If you told me that Betsy is literally Mac's slave, yeah idk about that statement or you now that you've said it. If you said Mac took her baby calf away from her while he's slick and red from birthing then slaughtered him a few weeks later, yea not much to refute.

 

Ultimately, I understand the vegan pov on the issue. Lemme go waay out there for a sec: imagine if some 4D species encounters earth and keeps the human population alive just for something we produce like idk hair or fingernails trimmings or breast milk. We'd be forcefully bred and culled and bred and repeat and bred specifically for the desired hairlength/color/nail-growing-rate/lactating-amount for thousands of years (god sex is disgusting). I'm sure some sci-fi show or movie out there has put the issue into a scene somewhere. Put ourselves into perspective and it's suddenly wrong. But wait -- humans and cows are different because humans more are sentient! Lemme introduce you real quick to the world of chimpanzee milk that I believe we should be capitalizing on.

[Dakota 4722]

I've already said. It's immoral, but I'm still gonna eat it. Fuck being a moral person, meat tastes 10x better than any plant based food you throw at me. 

[Yunki 2197]

12 minutes ago, Rootbeer said:

Contradict, but it seems like we're narrowing down the issue. We're moving the conclusion from "farms are bad because shitty farmers exist" to "shitty farming practices are bad because they actually do harm animals". The former splits vegans from non-vegans because while it has a good argument, the conclusion it draws is a little shaky (shitty foresting hurts the environment so ALL foresting needs to go). The latter conclusion unites the two towards a cause that can do good. If you told me that Betsy is literally Mac's slave, yeah idk about that statement or you now that you've said it. If you said Mac took her baby calf away from her while he's slick and red from birthing then slaughtered him a few weeks later, yea not much to refute.

 

Ultimately, I understand the vegan pov on the issue. Lemme go waay out there for a sec: imagine if some 4D species encounters earth and keeps the human population alive just for something we produce like idk hair or fingernails trimmings or breast milk. We'd be forcefully bred and culled and bred and repeat and bred specifically for the desired hairlength/color/nail-growing-rate/lactating-amount for thousands of years (god sex is disgusting). I'm sure some sci-fi show or movie out there has put the issue into a scene somewhere. Put ourselves into perspective and it's suddenly wrong. But wait -- humans and cows are different because humans more are sentient! Lemme introduce you real quick to the world of chimpanzee milk that I believe we should be capitalizing on.

4

I don't see it as a contradiction. There is no money to be made when you treat these animals properly, it is why those farms don't exist. It was a hypothetical and it stays like that. There is a reason why after all these documentaries came out about dairy, that local farmers and big dairy alike don't come out letting people see for themselves that everything is fine and dandy at their farms. Animal farms are inherently bad because to run a farm you need to make money, and you can't make money by treating these animals they way they should be treated. If you haven't yet, check out the documentary I posted, it will show you the standard conditions that these animals go through.

 

Quick edit: So many resources are used to help a cow survive, and if you can't even get the entire product (the milk) from the cow, then how do you plan on making that money. I see it as impossible to allow the calf to get all the milk it needs from its mother AND still allow a farmer to make money. Sure, in theory you can call it a contradiction, but in reality, the cows cannot get that treatment.

 

I'm kinda lost on your second paragraph lmao, specifically when you say "But wait -- humans and cows are different because humans more are sentient! Lemme introduce you real quick to the world of chimpanzee milk that I believe we should be capitalizing on."

8 minutes ago, Beerman said:

I've already said. It's immoral, but I'm still gonna eat it. Fuck being a moral person, meat tastes 10x better than any plant based food you throw at me. 

I'd suggest you give some plant-based foods a try. I'm sure some foods you already love are vegan or can easily be made vegan and you just haven't noticed.

 

On topic with you choosing to live an immoral life, I don't really know what to say. It opens up a big philosophical conversation about why we should strive to live a moral life for the betterment of the Earth, but I doubt you actually want to dive into that.

[The Ben 187]

@Yunki Are you allowed to eat tofu as a vegan?

[Rootbeer 1293]

1 minute ago, Yunki said:

Animal farms are inherently bad because to run a farm you need to make money, and you can't make money by treating these animals they way they should be treated.

... no money to be made when you treat these animals properly, it is why those farms don't exist.

Questionable claims.

2 minutes ago, Yunki said:

There is no money to be made when you treat these animals properly, it is why those farms don't exist. It was a hypothetical and it stays like that. There is a reason why after all these documentaries came out about dairy, that local farmers and big dairy alike don't come out letting people see for themselves that everything is fine and dandy at their farms.

This was something that I noticed earlier but didn't touch on. You don't need to be in it for the money. Subsistence farming exists. Even if we're not talking about that, other methods help with cashflow like selling a few to be slaughtered but obviously you're opposed to that. We're also ignoring Mac who just wants to chill on his farm where cows aren't the focus and who cares for each of his animals as if they're his own pets. I get that these videos are very eye-opening for the unaware but you keep focusing only on them and in doing so lump the good farmers in with the bad ones. They're all tainted in your eyes when you do so, it's a skewed pov.

 

And I was just memeing at the end how hypocritical the specieism view could be when we rank species by certain criteria. Issues start getting more personal and controversial when you apply them to people and other things we consider highly intelligent.

[BananaPeelz 709]

3 minutes ago, ✪ The Ben said:

@Yunki Are you allowed to eat tofu as a vegan?

Yeah it's just bean curd made from soybeans, so no animals are involved in its production. You do have to watch out for how it's cooked though. If it's fried in animal fat or prepared in some other manner that involves animal ingredients then it won't be vegan.

[Yunki 2197]

1 minute ago, Rootbeer said:

Questionable claims.

This was something that I noticed earlier but didn't touch on. You don't need to be in it for the money. Subsistence farming exists. Even if we're not talking about that, other methods help with cashflow like selling a few to be slaughtered but obviously you're opposed to that. We're also ignoring Mac who just wants to chill on his farm where cows aren't the focus and who cares for each of his animals as if they're his own pets. I get that these videos are very eye-opening for the unaware but you keep focusing only on them and in doing so lump the good farmers in with the bad ones. They're all tainted in your eyes when you do so, it's a skewed pov.

 

And I was just memeing at the end how hypocritical the specieism view could be when we rank species by certain criteria. Issues start getting more personal and controversial when you apply them to people and other things we consider highly intelligent.

Mac can live a life where cows aren't the focus, it's called growing crops. If he wants a cow as a pet, I suggest he rescues one before it gets slaughtered. 

 

I don't understand how my claim is questionable, the clear majority (<99%) of dairy production is not for the welfare of the animals, it's to sell their products. I would love to see a farm that does everything I brought up in your hypothetical. Until then, animal farming is inherently bad, it relies on the poor treatment of sentient beings in order to get a profit, the videos from documentaries show this to be true.

 

In regards to subsistence farming, a family can produce their needs through plant-based foods, they do not have to resort to using animals products. If a family rescues hens, doesn't breed them, and treats them as if they were family then sure go ahead and eat their eggs. But it seems like so much trouble in order to obtain the most ethical animal product. 

 

Lastly, I am not lumping good farmers with bad ones, I'm lumping less bad farmers with bad ones. When a farmer treats cows and chickens in the way I addressed in your hypothetical, then there can be a discussion held about good animal farmers existing. Also, even if you believe there are good farmers, the milk that a majority of us get do not come from them. If you believe that their good farmers and bad ones, at least look to stop increasing the demand from the bad ones. 

[Bear-Man-Thing 203]

I'm extremely passionate about zoos and aquariums so I'll stick to that.

 

21 hours ago, Yunki said:

In regards to zoos and aquariums, vegans attempt to not contribute to the exploitation of animals. While it may be cool for a class to see whales, fish, zebras, etc. it is not okay to keep them captive in an exhibit for what I assume to be the rest of their life. I know of few cases where the animals are rescues and they would not be able to survive alone in the wild, and that I believe can be argued to be a valid exception. However, as far as I know, most animals in zoos and aquariums do not fall under that category. As with animal testing, I am not the most well-versed so I would love to hear more about AZA institutation via PM or here.

Sorry, but AZA accredited institutions do not do animal testing.  That may have been a fault in my wording.  I apologize.  Here, you can see the basics for accreditation status for zoos and aquariums.  Being either accredited or certified by AZA, animal care and welfare is the top priority.  No animal is subjected to negative things while they are in the care of the institution.  There are not just a few cases of animal rescue, there are a TON of cases.  There are no cases in which animals can/are exploited.  The animals on display in an exhibit are expected (and do) have plenty of space to have a life of comfort and stimulation.  If they don't, the institution will lose accreditation until the needs are met.  I don't know of many zoos or aquariums in the western world that would not fall under the category that would not be able to be follow AZA guidelines and practices.  We strive to educate the public about the status of animals out in the wild that we exhibit behind our doors.  A ton of research is done to ensure we help conserve the animals out in the wild.  The animals that we may exhibit, when grown and are ready, are generally released back into the wild to help their local populations.

[Kingpin 5]

I personally think I am a bad person because I do love meat and eat it on a regular basis.  I know its bad for my health, bad for the environment, and bad for the animals.  I do think however that we should eat less meat in general but it is so hard because it is so delicious. I also grateful that you started this post because i get to see everyone great opinions and it feeds like people are actually taking this seriously unlike how I see people around me address this issue. 

[Oreo 2073]

One question

 

Can Vegans swallow?

 

 

[Rock 227]

This was actually very nice to read, but simply put i just enjoy the taste of meat and all the forms in which I can eat it so I don't think I will be vegan anytime soon.

 

[Ironic 2277]

There’s no way I’m gonna go through and ready everything you guys have been putting.... but I’ll just give my two cents on this subject.

 

Yes, I agree there’s some shitty farmers out there who abuse the hell out of animals before killing them when it’s there time. Hell, there’s so many out there and it’s just sad and wrong. I don’t agree with how most are doing it.

Here’s how I see it, humans > other animals/species. Call me an asshole or whatever, but I believe humans (being as we’re the alpha male so to speak of all other species) can eat whatever other animal we want. Even animals we consider pets here in America, because in other countries they eat cats and dogs. In a way I guess I’m saying humans get more rights than other animals/species. That’s just how it is.

People (like maybe yourself @Yunki idk what you do in your free time haha) can go out and protest, but the bottom line is humans will always have more rights than these other animals. Again, I don’t agree with abusing them whatsoever and making there life hell before they get killed so we can eat them, but I also don’t honestly have that much sympathy for them dying so we can have some tasty meat.