To eat meat, or not to eat meat...that is the question?

Brushing teeth: I still don't see your connexion. You should brush your teeth, partly because you decrease your risk of heart disease. By the same logic, you should not eat meat, then. Are you conceding that there are valid reason for going vegetarian? If so, you should probably make it more clear that that is what you are doing; otherwise, we are left guessing as to how brushing your teeth is an argument for eating meat. Mainly, what proof is their that meat is worse for heart disease? It is mostly based off of plaque, which forms with vegetables or meat, rebuttal to a previously unanswered statement about meat causing heart disease.

Milk: Another case where you should have made it explicit that you are not defending meat-eating. However, you're still incredibly wrong on how milk became a part of the European diet, and you should research it before you use that argument again. This is a decent summary of the development of lactose tolerance. We drink milk because there is this huge advertising campaign in the U.S. that is funded by the dairy industry, which tells us that milk does a body good, and that it is essential for strong, healthy teeth and bones. "Got Milk" ads for example. Well It will always be the newest hot celebrity that will pose for these ads and send the message that milk is necessary for strong bones. The USDA food pyramid even advocates that we drink 3 glasses of milk per day (or three servings of dairy foods) to get our recommended dose of calcium. But little do we know that calcium can be obtained from a variety of sources, not just milk. We drink milk because we are deceptively led to believe that it is vital for human health. But I beg to differ. They don't drink in in many parts of Europe, and they live just fine. It should not be used as a reason for being a vegan, as it is not the best thing to intake, it was first sold in the USA for money. You have to realize that your article was based off of Evolution of lactose intolerance, with no reference points. I will reply what you told me, "you're still incredibly wrong on how milk became a part of the European diet, and you should research it before you use that argument again." Though I was talking about the diet in general.

Serfs: I don't think you understand my problem here: Where is the source of your claim that serfs did better than nobles? Here it is, and it is a very interesting reading, you would enjoy it. "Throughout the medieval period, 30-year-old men from different segments of the population lived on average to about 52 years." The lifespan of a noble was the same. The thing is, nobles had next to nothing and poor living conditions, where as nobles and kings lived in healthier environments, with medical care and less work. Logically speaking, they death rates should be much different. They main overlying difference that this can be acquitted to is diet. Mostly vegetables is better than mostly meat. Though both is the best.

Nutrition: Fatty acids are found in various seeds and nuts, so it's not necessary to get them from meat. Getting these from meat is certainly easier, but saying it's "nearly impossible" is a gross overstatement. Also, please cite what nutrients can only be gotten from meat and fish, for I have not been able to find any. Lets see. "It is recommended that people eat fish to obtain all of the other nutrients that can't be found in supplements alone." And "foods such as tofu and other forms of soybeans, canola oil, walnuts and flaxseed, and their oils are recommended" as supplements." The alternative vegetarian foods are not as good as eating the fish. Consumption of meat quickly give nutrients. Plants may have many of the nutrients, but the amount that must be consumed to equal meat is overwhelming.

Discrimination: The key fault to your analogy is that the races all have sentience. As far as we know, there is no awareness in plants, nor a mechanism by which such an awareness can take place. We then see various forms of life with different levels of awareness. For example, my vegetarian sister is likely to eat shrimp, simply because she doesn't see them as having consciousness. Sentience and physical characteristics are not equatable. Shrimp are stupid, but they are just as stupid as sheep. They wander around aimlessly with out any guidance looking for food, eating it, and moving on again. Your sister eats sheep than as well? Flowers have " Sentience." Sentience is a feeling or sensation as distinguished from perception and thought. Latin root Sentient, which is to perceive or feel. Perception is awareness. Plants are aware of sunlight and perceive it. They follow the sunlight over the course of the day. Moss will grow where their is food, perceiving that it is there and taking advantage of it. Can you prove that they entire plant does not work like a brain and body as one, and that they are not just more perfected at communication within itself then humans, and that plants live without a brain, but instead in some way that our meager minds cannot yet comprehend? I don't think so.

Let me add another one in for you: Our bodies are just like a carnivore’s! That’s why we have alkaline saliva to digest starches, which are strictly found in plants; a very long digestive tract so animal flesh, which has no fiber, can sit and rot for days; and very sharp teeth and claws for biting into an animal and killing it with our bare hands. We also can outrun most animals at our blazing top speed of ~25 mph and tackle them. Our bodies appear to be made to eat animals.

Another thing as well. Vegans are often liars. They wear and use leather. They eat Jello and honey. They wear wool. They use sponges to clean with. Veganism is a philosophy and lifestyle whose adherents seek to exclude the use of animals for food, clothing, or any other purpose. This is not true for most vegans. They need to either walk the walk or stop the talk. How about Benzoic Acid, a common preservative? Why do people claim to be a vegan if it is nearly impossible? I know for a fact.

Brushing teeth: No, poor dental hygiene is not the reason meat consumption is linked to heart disease. It's about the cholesterol intake that makes your heart have to work harder to provide the same benefit to you.

Milk: The article's from the Smithsonian magazine website; I think it's a credible source, especially since it it talking about what a book written by two professors of anthropology. And we know that dairy farming and adult lactose tolerance developed around the same time, so it refutes your statement that milk is the result of 20th century marketing. I'll agree that there's a hype over the nutritional value of milk, but it's still a good way to get various essential vitamins. And you're really going to have to source me on the claim that the first instance of milk sales occurred in the US.

Serfs: No, the article said they both lived to be the same age, then. It also says that both of the classes had an unhealthy lifestyle. Working means serfs are more physically active, so they should be healthier than a loafing noble. But the nobles weren't always lazy, though, as they would oft go to war, decreasing the average lifespan. Medicine wasn't as good those days (sometimes worse than just leaving whatever was ailing you alone, sometimes), so that's no advantage to noble lifespan. I think you're taking a negative claim an jumping through hoops to try to say something that's easily brought down.

Nutrition: And another article from the same website says you can get all the nutrients you need from a vegetarian diet.

Discrimination: It's true that "consciousness" would have been a better word to use than "sentience". Technically, no, I cannot prove that plants aren't conscious; however, it's not my place to prove a negative; instead, the burden of evidence would be on the positive claim that plants are conscious. And an argument against conscious plant life is: there is no direct line of communication between the different parts of the plant. Our brain, and by extension our nervous system, is a large network of specially designed cells that communicate with each other through chemical and electrical signals. Plants have no such thing, nor a means for it.

Made for meat: First, our nails are not very useful offensively (or defensively, for that matter). You'll have more luck trying to break something's neck with your elbow than cutting it with your nails. As for teeth, we only have four canines. We have more incisors, molars, and bicuspids. I've always thought that our bicuspids were a sign that we were moving toward a more vegetarian diet. Also, 25 mph is not actually that fast. We can only do it for a short period of time, and we have large problems taking sharp turns. Try chasing down a rabbit some time; we're faster than they are, but it can out-maneuver us. We learnt to hunt with our minds, not our bodies.

Vegans: Some vegans are as you say they are; some, however, are not. I think that was a rather hasty generalization you just did there.

KageShadowlance wrote:

Another thing as well. Vegans are often liars. They wear and use leather. They eat Jello and honey. They wear wool. They use sponges to clean with. Veganism is a philosophy and lifestyle whose adherents seek to exclude the use of animals for food, clothing, or any other purpose. This is not true for most vegans. They need to either walk the walk or stop the talk. How about Benzoic Acid, a common preservative? Why do people claim to be a vegan if it is nearly impossible? I know for a fact.

Ill have to disagree with you. MY girlfriend is vegan, and although difficult at times, it is not impossible to avoid animal products all together. If a vegan uses something with an animal product but does not realize it has an animal product then they cannot be guilty since they have ignorance as there defence. To fully know each and every animal product would require vigourous studying and research which my girlfriend and i do. A vegan cannot be called a vegan if they use animal products they are then considered vegetarians such as myself. To learn more about how to live the vegan lifestyle and what it really means to be vegan check this website out

http://www.veganmeans.com/

PLus its not bad to be vegetarian or vegan, just healthier than the common average american diet. Studies have linked these diets to longevity so i see no harm in doing them. Its a lifestyle choice just like a beleif system.

I can not disagree that Vegetarianism is often healthier than almost any other diet. I eat mostly vegetables myself. My biggest thing though is that meat should be eaten along with everything else. I can not convince a vegetarian to eat meat very easily, just like you can not convince me to become a vegetarian.

I am going to take a break from this debate and start another.This problem, once again, comes down to religion.

The main reason that people become a vegetarian is this:

"One reason people decide to become vegetarian is because they learn about how animals raised for food are treated and forced to live in overcrowded, inhumane conditions before the slaughtering process. For example, chickens are obligated to live in very small cages and are de-beaked. People who believe this is wrong and don't want to support these abhorrent practices choose a vegetarian lifestyle for ethical reasons."

It comes down to beliefs on what is right and wrong. People decide what is right and wrong in their own mind based on personal beliefs and choices.

The debate eventually boils down to beliefs. I can put info out there pro or con, and there may not be a rebuttal for either.

Why don't you eat meat can be replied, why do you eat meat.

The answer is because either you believe that it is wrong, or that it is not wrong.

Ultimately everything comes down to beliefs: Gay rights, abortion, vegetarianism, alien existence, human existence, the death penalty... The list goes on and on.

Please take a look at the debate I am starting.