Forcing Your Child to be Vegan/Vegetarian.
Replies
-
You can keep hanging on to that but I said that pain serves the purpose of alerting us to negative stimuli. While plants do not feel "pain" they do feel something akin to pain since they also have some sort of mechanism that alerts them to negative stimuli. If you can overlook the literal definition of murder you can also see past this if you actually wanted to see the point.
Robots can be programmed to avoid obstacles which could end them. Those potentially destructive obstacles could be construed as 'negative stimuli.' Observing their evasive behavior could make you think they are avoiding 'pain.' But, are they? Are plants?
Robots do not do it to survive. They do it because we program them to. Plants do it to survive. Why is it so hard to see plants react to external stimuli in order to survive and thrive? Plants kill each other while competing for resources as well as to defend their progeny.
I think you are a little confused. What does reacting to stimuli have to do with thinking or feeling pain? One cell organisms react to stimuli? Are you claiming they think? When you use a term like "feel pain," or "want to do something," you should try to use it in a standard way, i.e., in a way that the language expects it to be used. By your definition, practically everything except rocks think.0 -
You can keep hanging on to that but I said that pain serves the purpose of alerting us to negative stimuli. While plants do not feel "pain" they do feel something akin to pain since they also have some sort of mechanism that alerts them to negative stimuli. If you can overlook the literal definition of murder you can also see past this if you actually wanted to see the point.
Robots can be programmed to avoid obstacles which could end them. Those potentially destructive obstacles could be construed as 'negative stimuli.' Observing their evasive behavior could make you think they are avoiding 'pain.' But, are they? Are plants?
Robots do not do it to survive. They do it because we program them to. Plants do it to survive. Why is it so hard to see plants react to external stimuli in order to survive and thrive? Plants kill each other while competing for resources as well as to defend their progeny.
Sentience and the ability to suffer are the things that are critical factors in this discussion. Please provide some scientific proof that plants are sentient and feel pain.0 -
Yes, innerfatgirl, I'm seriuos. We've already established that the literal definition of murder does not apply to animals, so I'm not murdering them. I'm not trying to be sarcastic. I'm looking for a rational, intelligent reply to why it bothers some vegans/vegetarians that others eat meat.Are you joking, or did you seriously just ask me why I care if you eat meat?
Sigh. So, you're asking an ethical vegetarian why she is bothered by other people eating meat?
Well. I'm trying to be serious here, but come on. I believe it is disgusting, immoral and evil that we kill animals. Moreso that we enslave them, abuse them, keep them trapped in factory farms for life and then murder them (and, yes, the animals are not stupid. They know what's about to go down in that slaughterhouse). I choose not to eat meat for this reason. So, yes, it does bother me if other people eat meat. Because they're contributing to it. They're eating the meat of a murdered living being. And I think that is wrong. If people started killing babies to eat them, I'd be bothered by it too.
This is why it bothers me, in simple terms;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUkHkyy4uqw
I assume you're against peadophillia, and that you have no desire to be a peadophile? But why does it bother you if some men or women are?! (Yes. That's how ridiculous your question was to me)
And, again, just because the law does not apply murder to animals, it doesn't mean it's not immoral, or can't be defined as murder. The law changes all the time. Like I said, you could kill your slave before. It wasn't murder.
Oh, and this;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDXvm8Vwb1I&feature=fvwrel 0 -
Yes, innerfatgirl, I'm seriuos. We've already established that the literal definition of murder does not apply to animals, so I'm not murdering them. I'm not trying to be sarcastic. I'm looking for a rational, intelligent reply to why it bothers some vegans/vegetarians that others eat meat.Are you joking, or did you seriously just ask me why I care if you eat meat?
Some vegetarians/vegans have abolitionist hopes and dreams. Simply stated, they would like to see animal killing abolished.
We live in a culture of moral relativism, so many people don't understand why other people might think there's an absolute right and wrong to anything. There some people who believe killing animals is wrong. They see a vegetarian world as a more progressive one. In my experience, vegetarians with this mindset can get annoyed when people act as though the inhumane slaughter of an animal doesn't matter to them, but the issue for them, goes way beyond whether you individually eat meat.
Sometimes, just sometimes, vegans/vegetarians are as bad as holy rollers/atheists about imposing their ideals/faith/motives on other people, etc.0 -
You can keep hanging on to that but I said that pain serves the purpose of alerting us to negative stimuli. While plants do not feel "pain" they do feel something akin to pain since they also have some sort of mechanism that alerts them to negative stimuli. If you can overlook the literal definition of murder you can also see past this if you actually wanted to see the point.
Robots can be programmed to avoid obstacles which could end them. Those potentially destructive obstacles could be construed as 'negative stimuli.' Observing their evasive behavior could make you think they are avoiding 'pain.' But, are they? Are plants?
Robots do not do it to survive. They do it because we program them to. Plants do it to survive. Why is it so hard to see plants react to external stimuli in order to survive and thrive? Plants kill each other while competing for resources as well as to defend their progeny.
Sentience and the ability to suffer are the things that are critical factors in this discussion. Please provide some scientific proof that plants are sentient and feel pain.
^
Some vegetarians/vegans have abolitionist hopes and dreams. Simply stated, they would like to see animal killing abolished.
We live in a culture of moral relativism, so many people don't understand why other people might think there's an absolute right and wrong to anything. There are some people who believe killing animals is wrong. They see a vegetarian world as a more progressive one. In my experience, vegetarians with this mindset can get annoyed when people act as though the inhumane slaughter of an animal doesn't matter to them, but the issue for them, goes way beyond whether you individually eat meat.
You got it.0 -
You can keep hanging on to that but I said that pain serves the purpose of alerting us to negative stimuli. While plants do not feel "pain" they do feel something akin to pain since they also have some sort of mechanism that alerts them to negative stimuli. If you can overlook the literal definition of murder you can also see past this if you actually wanted to see the point.
Robots can be programmed to avoid obstacles which could end them. Those potentially destructive obstacles could be construed as 'negative stimuli.' Observing their evasive behavior could make you think they are avoiding 'pain.' But, are they? Are plants?
Robots do not do it to survive. They do it because we program them to. Plants do it to survive. Why is it so hard to see plants react to external stimuli in order to survive and thrive? Plants kill each other while competing for resources as well as to defend their progeny.
I think you are a little confused. What does reacting to stimuli have to do with thinking or feeling pain? One cell organisms react to stimuli? Are you claiming they think? When you use a term like "feel pain," or "want to do something," you should try to use it in a standard way, i.e., in a way that the language expects it to be used. By your definition, practically everything except rocks think.
I have yet to use the term "think." I have said that they react to negative stimuli. I have also stated that the purpose of "pain" is to alert the animal to negative stimuli. Therefore, plants do "feel" something akin to pain. Are you actually going to argue semantics rather than the actual issue?0 -
Yes, innerfatgirl, I'm seriuos. We've already established that the literal definition of murder does not apply to animals, so I'm not murdering them. I'm not trying to be sarcastic. I'm looking for a rational, intelligent reply to why it bothers some vegans/vegetarians that others eat meat.Are you joking, or did you seriously just ask me why I care if you eat meat?
Some vegetarians/vegans have abolitionist hopes and dreams. Simply stated, they would like to see animal killing abolished.
We live in a culture of moral relativism, so many people don't understand why other people might think there's an absolute right and wrong to anything. There some people who believe killing animals is wrong. They see a vegetarian world as a more progressive one. In my experience, vegetarians with this mindset can get annoyed when people act as though the inhumane slaughter of an animal doesn't matter to them, but the issue for them, goes way beyond whether you individually eat meat.
Sometimes, just sometimes, vegans/vegetarians are as bad as holy rollers/atheists about imposing their ideals/faith/motives on other people, etc.
You asked for an explanation. At one time, slavery was regarded as a 'right' of white landowners in this country. No, I am NOT EQUATING humans with animals. I am merely pointing out that the politics of using living beings to our own ends has changed for the better, and can change again.0 -
Yes, innerfatgirl, I'm seriuos. We've already established that the literal definition of murder does not apply to animals, so I'm not murdering them. I'm not trying to be sarcastic. I'm looking for a rational, intelligent reply to why it bothers some vegans/vegetarians that others eat meat.Are you joking, or did you seriously just ask me why I care if you eat meat?
Some vegetarians/vegans have abolitionist hopes and dreams. Simply stated, they would like to see animal killing abolished.
We live in a culture of moral relativism, so many people don't understand why other people might think there's an absolute right and wrong to anything. There some people who believe killing animals is wrong. They see a vegetarian world as a more progressive one. In my experience, vegetarians with this mindset can get annoyed when people act as though the inhumane slaughter of an animal doesn't matter to them, but the issue for them, goes way beyond whether you individually eat meat.
Sometimes, just sometimes, vegans/vegetarians are as bad as holy rollers/atheists about imposing their ideals/faith/motives on other people, etc.
Yep. Because being against suffering and killing is the same as believing/not believing in something no-one can prove exists.
Of course it is.
Just like being vehemently against child abuse is like being a bible basher.
Of course it is.0 -
Yes, innerfatgirl, I'm seriuos. We've already established that the literal definition of murder does not apply to animals, so I'm not murdering them. I'm not trying to be sarcastic. I'm looking for a rational, intelligent reply to why it bothers some vegans/vegetarians that others eat meat.Are you joking, or did you seriously just ask me why I care if you eat meat?
It is offensive. Would it bother you if I were sitting at a dinner table eating the meat off of a human hand? Logically you may not have any qualms with that, since hypothetically, the hand may come from someone who died a natural death. However, would you find eating human flesh offensive?
If you look at humans as being deserving of respect even when they are dead, is it such a great stretch to understand that some of us look on animals the same way?0 -
You can keep hanging on to that but I said that pain serves the purpose of alerting us to negative stimuli. While plants do not feel "pain" they do feel something akin to pain since they also have some sort of mechanism that alerts them to negative stimuli. If you can overlook the literal definition of murder you can also see past this if you actually wanted to see the point.
Robots can be programmed to avoid obstacles which could end them. Those potentially destructive obstacles could be construed as 'negative stimuli.' Observing their evasive behavior could make you think they are avoiding 'pain.' But, are they? Are plants?
Robots do not do it to survive. They do it because we program them to. Plants do it to survive. Why is it so hard to see plants react to external stimuli in order to survive and thrive? Plants kill each other while competing for resources as well as to defend their progeny.
Sentience and the ability to suffer are the things that are critical factors in this discussion. Please provide some scientific proof that plants are sentient and feel pain.
Until recently, as has been said earlier in this thread, we did not believe that animals were sentient.0 -
Yes, innerfatgirl, I'm seriuos. We've already established that the literal definition of murder does not apply to animals, so I'm not murdering them. I'm not trying to be sarcastic. I'm looking for a rational, intelligent reply to why it bothers some vegans/vegetarians that others eat meat.Are you joking, or did you seriously just ask me why I care if you eat meat?
Patti, the reason why is because she feels it is morally wrong. Whether or not you agree with her, she (or vegetarians) feels you are doing something bad and wrong by supporting the meat industry. So she wants you, and everyone else, to stop doing that.
A parallel I think you'll immediately understand: Some folks spend a lot of effort trying to convince pregnant women not to choose to have an abortion. They would never get an abortion themselves, but it still upsets them tremendously that other people would do that, and they don't want them to do that.0 -
Yes. Isn't that the best person to ask this if I'm looking for a serious answer?Sigh. So, you're asking an ethical vegetarian why she is bothered by other people eating meat?
Well. I'm trying to be serious here, but come on. I believe it is disgusting, immoral and evil that we kill animals. [/quote]
"Immoral and evil" is what I'm focusing on here. What sources do you have that support that claim? Please know that I'm really serious here. I'm really interested in knowing why some people believe it's morally wrong to eat meat.0 -
You can keep hanging on to that but I said that pain serves the purpose of alerting us to negative stimuli. While plants do not feel "pain" they do feel something akin to pain since they also have some sort of mechanism that alerts them to negative stimuli. If you can overlook the literal definition of murder you can also see past this if you actually wanted to see the point.
Robots can be programmed to avoid obstacles which could end them. Those potentially destructive obstacles could be construed as 'negative stimuli.' Observing their evasive behavior could make you think they are avoiding 'pain.' But, are they? Are plants?
Robots do not do it to survive. They do it because we program them to. Plants do it to survive. Why is it so hard to see plants react to external stimuli in order to survive and thrive? Plants kill each other while competing for resources as well as to defend their progeny.
Sentience and the ability to suffer are the things that are critical factors in this discussion. Please provide some scientific proof that plants are sentient and feel pain.
Until recently, as has been said earlier in this thread, we did not believe that animals were sentient.
Yes, but we do. Tangible fact. Why not act on that, and let the matter of plant consciousness work its way out? If we found out that plants get all ouchy when we eat them, then maybe we can invent chemicals derived from rocks which can sustain us until we find out that rocks feel pain. Then we can all collectively drink the cyanide-laced kool aid due to our deep concern for rock 'suffering.'0 -
You can keep hanging on to that but I said that pain serves the purpose of alerting us to negative stimuli. While plants do not feel "pain" they do feel something akin to pain since they also have some sort of mechanism that alerts them to negative stimuli. If you can overlook the literal definition of murder you can also see past this if you actually wanted to see the point.
Robots can be programmed to avoid obstacles which could end them. Those potentially destructive obstacles could be construed as 'negative stimuli.' Observing their evasive behavior could make you think they are avoiding 'pain.' But, are they? Are plants?
Robots do not do it to survive. They do it because we program them to. Plants do it to survive. Why is it so hard to see plants react to external stimuli in order to survive and thrive? Plants kill each other while competing for resources as well as to defend their progeny.
I think you are a little confused. What does reacting to stimuli have to do with thinking or feeling pain? One cell organisms react to stimuli? Are you claiming they think? When you use a term like "feel pain," or "want to do something," you should try to use it in a standard way, i.e., in a way that the language expects it to be used. By your definition, practically everything except rocks think.
I have yet to use the term "think." I have said that they react to negative stimuli. I have also stated that the purpose of "pain" is to alert the animal to negative stimuli. Therefore, plants do "feel" something akin to pain. Are you actually going to argue semantics rather than the actual issue?
I don't think it is possible to argue with you rationally since you are using standard English words in a non-standard way. Because you may see something as "akin" to something else does not mean that they are the same thing. Genetic survival mechanisms are not the same thing as pain, although pain is a very small subset of the set of genetic survival mechanisms. Do they all have in common that they help the organism survive? Yes. But that is as much of an analogy as you can draw.0 -
You can keep hanging on to that but I said that pain serves the purpose of alerting us to negative stimuli. While plants do not feel "pain" they do feel something akin to pain since they also have some sort of mechanism that alerts them to negative stimuli. If you can overlook the literal definition of murder you can also see past this if you actually wanted to see the point.
Robots can be programmed to avoid obstacles which could end them. Those potentially destructive obstacles could be construed as 'negative stimuli.' Observing their evasive behavior could make you think they are avoiding 'pain.' But, are they? Are plants?
Robots do not do it to survive. They do it because we program them to. Plants do it to survive. Why is it so hard to see plants react to external stimuli in order to survive and thrive? Plants kill each other while competing for resources as well as to defend their progeny.
Sentience and the ability to suffer are the things that are critical factors in this discussion. Please provide some scientific proof that plants are sentient and feel pain.
Until recently, as has been said earlier in this thread, we did not believe that animals were sentient.
Yes, but we do. Tangible fact. Why not act on that, and let the matter of plant consciousness work its way out? Then maybe we can invent chemicals derived from rocks until we work out the extent of their consciousness. Then we can drink all collectively drink the cyanide kool aid due to our deep concern for rock 'suffering.'
Or just acknowledge that death is required for life.0 -
Patti, the reason why is because she feels it is morally wrong. Whether or not you agree with her, she (or vegetarians) feels you are doing something bad and wrong by supporting the meat industry. So she wants you, and everyone else, to stop doing that.
A parallel I think you'll immediately understand: Some folks spend a lot of effort trying to convince pregnant women not to choose to have an abortion. They would never get an abortion themselves, but it still upsets them tremendously that other people would do that, and they don't want them to do that.
I'm just curious on the basis for ethical vegetarians to say it's morally wrong. Like, I can say why I believe abortion is wrong, and it's grounded in my Christianity. That's the basis for my moral beliefs. I'm really trying to be sincere in asking if there is a basis other than how one "feels". Perhaps I'm not approaching it the right way.0 -
You can keep hanging on to that but I said that pain serves the purpose of alerting us to negative stimuli. While plants do not feel "pain" they do feel something akin to pain since they also have some sort of mechanism that alerts them to negative stimuli. If you can overlook the literal definition of murder you can also see past this if you actually wanted to see the point.
Robots can be programmed to avoid obstacles which could end them. Those potentially destructive obstacles could be construed as 'negative stimuli.' Observing their evasive behavior could make you think they are avoiding 'pain.' But, are they? Are plants?
Robots do not do it to survive. They do it because we program them to. Plants do it to survive. Why is it so hard to see plants react to external stimuli in order to survive and thrive? Plants kill each other while competing for resources as well as to defend their progeny.
I think you are a little confused. What does reacting to stimuli have to do with thinking or feeling pain? One cell organisms react to stimuli? Are you claiming they think? When you use a term like "feel pain," or "want to do something," you should try to use it in a standard way, i.e., in a way that the language expects it to be used. By your definition, practically everything except rocks think.
I have yet to use the term "think." I have said that they react to negative stimuli. I have also stated that the purpose of "pain" is to alert the animal to negative stimuli. Therefore, plants do "feel" something akin to pain. Are you actually going to argue semantics rather than the actual issue?
I don't think it is possible to argue with you rationally since you are using standard English words in a non-standard way. Because you may see something as "akin" to something else does not mean that they are the same thing. Genetic survival mechanisms are not the same thing as pain, although pain is a very small subset of the set of genetic survival mechanisms. Do they all have in common that they help the organism survive? Yes. But that is as much of an analogy as you can draw.
It is difficult to discuss something with someone who refuses to look at an issue or topic from all angles. If you don't question and pursue, you can be safe in your world view. I'll leave you to it.0 -
Yes. Isn't that the best person to ask this if I'm looking for a serious answer?Sigh. So, you're asking an ethical vegetarian why she is bothered by other people eating meat?
"Immoral and evil" is what I'm focusing on here. What sources do you have that support that claim? Please know that I'm really serious here. I'm really interested in knowing why some people believe it's morally wrong to eat meat.Well. I'm trying to be serious here, but come on. I believe it is disgusting, immoral and evil that we kill animals.
[/quote]
My sources are myself. I believe that causing pain, suffering and death to an innocent living being, capable of pain and suffering, for no other reason except from profit, public demand and greed is immoral and wrong.
I answered your last question in my PP.0 -
My question is, would you let your child choose? Or force them into eating how you eat? Is it too much to make seperate meals? Or is it worth it to let your child feel in control?
The way these questions read to me--a vegetarian parent who is raising her children vegetarian:
1. "My question is, would you let your child choose?" No one would simply answer 'No' to this question, since s/he would worry about coming across like a controlling monster. It's a closed question, much like 'How often do you beat your wife?' .'
2. "Or force them into eating how you eat?" The word 'force' is a strongly emotive word. Again this is a closed question. Would anyone answer this way: "Yes, I'm a horrible parent who forces my kids to be little clones of me. I tolerate no individuality in my children".
3. "Is it too much to make separate meals?" The phraseology here implies laziness on the part of vegetarian parents. Most vegetarian parents aren't lazy, but are making active decisions to feed their families how they see fit.
4. "Or is it worth it to let your child feel in control." Again, who's going to answer 'No' to this. It's another closed question.
I agree with you. I'm not a vegetarian, but I immediately could see how biased-sounding the questions are.
Just by using the word "force" there is a negative connotation already created.
I think the word "force" is used because vegetarianism is looked at with a slightly suspicious eye by a lot of mainstream America. If someone is a vege, or a vegan, the stereotype is that they are some sort of hippie granola birkenstock-wearing type.
I've also observed that this type of reaction doesn't seem to happen as much if the vegetarianism is religious. Would you ask a Hindu if they are going to "force" their children to be vegetarians, or would you just easily accept that naturally, children will be reared with the same religious values as their parents. But if the vegetarian is an American, who chose to be vege because (insert any reason), then we wonder why that weirdo has chosen to be different from us? What's wrong with meat, HUH?0 -
Yes, innerfatgirl, I'm seriuos. We've already established that the literal definition of murder does not apply to animals, so I'm not murdering them. I'm not trying to be sarcastic. I'm looking for a rational, intelligent reply to why it bothers some vegans/vegetarians that others eat meat.Are you joking, or did you seriously just ask me why I care if you eat meat?
Patti, the reason why is because she feels it is morally wrong. Whether or not you agree with her, she (or vegetarians) feels you are doing something bad and wrong by supporting the meat industry. So she wants you, and everyone else, to stop doing that.
A parallel I think you'll immediately understand: Some folks spend a lot of effort trying to convince pregnant women not to choose to have an abortion. They would never get an abortion themselves, but it still upsets them tremendously that other people would do that, and they don't want them to do that.
Yes. And, *shock horror* I am against abortion. However, much like with my vegetarianism, I don't spend time and effort convincing people to not have abortions. If people ask me my opinion on it, or a debate arises, I will participate, but otherwise, I don't really mention it.
But there's always going to be selfish people in this world who believe they're more important than innocents. Always been that way, and probably will be until our species finally self destructs.0 -
My sources are myself. I believe that causing pain, suffering and death to an innocent living being, capable of pain and suffering, for no other reason except from profit, public demand and greed is immoral and wrong.
The words "immoral" and "evil" usually have a religious or cultural basis. That's why I was wondering. It's one thing to "feel" something is bad, and another to have a basis for that feeling. If you have no basis for your morality, that's fine. I was just wondering if you did.0 -
Patti, the reason why is because she feels it is morally wrong. Whether or not you agree with her, she (or vegetarians) feels you are doing something bad and wrong by supporting the meat industry. So she wants you, and everyone else, to stop doing that.
A parallel I think you'll immediately understand: Some folks spend a lot of effort trying to convince pregnant women not to choose to have an abortion. They would never get an abortion themselves, but it still upsets them tremendously that other people would do that, and they don't want them to do that.
I'm just curious on the basis for ethical vegetarians to say it's morally wrong. Like, I can say why I believe abortion is wrong, and it's grounded in my Christianity. That's the basis for my moral beliefs. I'm really trying to be sincere in asking if there is a basis other than how one "feels". Perhaps I'm not approaching it the right way.
To me, it's an extension of 'Do not kill.' There is no Christian imperative to extend the 'Do not kill' commandment to non-human animals, but it just seems kind to do so. I can live well eating plants, and no animals need to be killed to feed me. So, I say, why not just 'say no' to gratuitous killing in the name of compassion to other creatures who share this planet with us.0 -
Patti, the reason why is because she feels it is morally wrong. Whether or not you agree with her, she (or vegetarians) feels you are doing something bad and wrong by supporting the meat industry. So she wants you, and everyone else, to stop doing that.
A parallel I think you'll immediately understand: Some folks spend a lot of effort trying to convince pregnant women not to choose to have an abortion. They would never get an abortion themselves, but it still upsets them tremendously that other people would do that, and they don't want them to do that.
I'm just curious on the basis for ethical vegetarians to say it's morally wrong. Like, I can say why I believe abortion is wrong, and it's grounded in my Christianity. That's the basis for my moral beliefs. I'm really trying to be sincere in asking if there is a basis other than how one "feels". Perhaps I'm not approaching it the right way.
So why can you have morals based on your religion, but I can't have morals based on my thoughts/feelings/opinions?
Yours are somehow more valid because they're based on a book? (where does it say that abortion is wrong in the bible, anyway. Serious question)0 -
If you're doing it at all, I think you need to take some growth and development and nutrition courses. After that, sure, your kid, your rules. See how that works out when the kid is a teenager, though. :laugh:
My best friend's father was vegetarian. Her mother wasn't, but they all ate according to her father's eating habits. To this day, she rarely eats meat and neither do her three siblings. You grow up eating a certain way and that's what you're used to.
While none of them are strict vegetarians, they just rarely enjoy meat so they rarely eat it.
They're also, all four of them, extremely healthy people so the diet didn't harm them at all. In fact, the shortest of all four of them (two boys and two girls) is 5'7".0 -
My question is, would you let your child choose? Or force them into eating how you eat? Is it too much to make seperate meals? Or is it worth it to let your child feel in control?
The way these questions read to me--a vegetarian parent who is raising her children vegetarian:
1. "My question is, would you let your child choose?" No one would simply answer 'No' to this question, since s/he would worry about coming across like a controlling monster. It's a closed question, much like 'How often do you beat your wife?' .'
2. "Or force them into eating how you eat?" The word 'force' is a strongly emotive word. Again this is a closed question. Would anyone answer this way: "Yes, I'm a horrible parent who forces my kids to be little clones of me. I tolerate no individuality in my children".
3. "Is it too much to make separate meals?" The phraseology here implies laziness on the part of vegetarian parents. Most vegetarian parents aren't lazy, but are making active decisions to feed their families how they see fit.
4. "Or is it worth it to let your child feel in control." Again, who's going to answer 'No' to this. It's another closed question.
I agree with you. I'm not a vegetarian, but I immediately could see how biased-sounding the questions are.
Just by using the word "force" there is a negative connotation already created.
I think the word "force" is used because vegetarianism is looked at with a slightly suspicious eye by a lot of mainstream America. If someone is a vege, or a vegan, the stereotype is that they are some sort of hippie granola birkenstock-wearing type.
I've also observed that this type of reaction doesn't seem to happen as much if the vegetarianism is religious. Would you ask a Hindu if they are going to "force" their children to be vegetarians, or would you just easily accept that naturally, children will be reared with the same religious values as their parents. But if the vegetarian is an American, who chose to be vege because (insert any reason), then we wonder why that weirdo has chosen to be different from us? What's wrong with meat, HUH?
Very well stated!! Thank you.0 -
My sources are myself. I believe that causing pain, suffering and death to an innocent living being, capable of pain and suffering, for no other reason except from profit, public demand and greed is immoral and wrong.
The words "immoral" and "evil" usually have a religious or cultural basis. That's why I was wondering. It's one thing to "feel" something is bad, and another to have a basis for that feeling. If you have no basis for your morality, that's fine. I was just wondering if you did.
Perhaps they do, but that probably has something to do with the fact that most people are theists.
And perhaps my belief is cultural. Culture dictates that killing is wrong. I don't see the need to discriminate animals from that viewpoint.0 -
bump0
-
Patti, the reason why is because she feels it is morally wrong. Whether or not you agree with her, she (or vegetarians) feels you are doing something bad and wrong by supporting the meat industry. So she wants you, and everyone else, to stop doing that.
A parallel I think you'll immediately understand: Some folks spend a lot of effort trying to convince pregnant women not to choose to have an abortion. They would never get an abortion themselves, but it still upsets them tremendously that other people would do that, and they don't want them to do that.
I'm just curious on the basis for ethical vegetarians to say it's morally wrong. Like, I can say why I believe abortion is wrong, and it's grounded in my Christianity. That's the basis for my moral beliefs. I'm really trying to be sincere in asking if there is a basis other than how one "feels". Perhaps I'm not approaching it the right way.
So why can you have morals based on your religion, but I can't have morals based on my thoughts/feelings/opinions?
Yours are somehow more valid because they're based on a book? (where does it say that abortion is wrong in the bible, anyway. Serious question)
We think it's morally wrong to murder an animal to feed ourselves when we don't have to. Especially those of us who know we could never take an animal's life on our own and don't feel right eating something we bought in the grocery store and being that separated from the process.0 -
bump
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:0 -
Patti, the reason why is because she feels it is morally wrong. Whether or not you agree with her, she (or vegetarians) feels you are doing something bad and wrong by supporting the meat industry. So she wants you, and everyone else, to stop doing that.
A parallel I think you'll immediately understand: Some folks spend a lot of effort trying to convince pregnant women not to choose to have an abortion. They would never get an abortion themselves, but it still upsets them tremendously that other people would do that, and they don't want them to do that.
I'm just curious on the basis for ethical vegetarians to say it's morally wrong. Like, I can say why I believe abortion is wrong, and it's grounded in my Christianity. That's the basis for my moral beliefs. I'm really trying to be sincere in asking if there is a basis other than how one "feels". Perhaps I'm not approaching it the right way.
So why can you have morals based on your religion, but I can't have morals based on my thoughts/feelings/opinions?
Yours are somehow more valid because they're based on a book? (where does it say that abortion is wrong in the bible, anyway. Serious question)
I agree that religion isn't the only thing that 'counts' when it comes to 'grounding' an ethical point of view. An ethic can be grounded in secular influences like science, and logic. Bringing up religious doctrine doesn't seem fitting on a debate board, unless everyone is coming from the same religious tradition.0
This discussion has been closed.