Those who are against fur or eating meat for "moral" reasons are simpering turds

By Kristen:

I think its "its okay to fish , cause they dont have any feelings"

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

An argument a friend said to me was that if we didnt eat cows we would be overun by them. He then told me how many cows were slaughtered during the 'foot and mouth' scare. I dont think we would be overun by them. Not at all. I think more people would be killed by cows though. Their natural defence is horns (note that we have none.maybe the brain!). At present cows are placid becasuse they have had their 'spirit' bred out of them. They have learned helplessness and know nothing else. To let them live a full life without killiings would probably mean they would start to break out and charge people. Who knows. Who cares. We shouldnt kill them full stop.
Heres another point. The form of animals is symmetrical: Cows, scorpions, humans etc are all symmetrical. Trees and bushes are not. Just something i noticed. However their fruit or grain is: apples, oranges, acors etc. They are 'born' symmetrical and grow to become asymmetrical. Maybe we shouldnt eat fruit/veg either. Maybe just trees: doesnt symmetry imply design? Most things we make are symmetrical (except if it is not practical for the use of the object) and we have designed and made them: cars, caps, plugs. Symmetry implies design i think. In the beginning God would have made the fruit and seeds. He wouldnt have made the fully grown trees (maybe not anyway). Doesnt symmetry also mean: balance, stablity and safeness?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

in what way are plants not symmetrical?

and about if we are carnivores or herbivores i would reply that we are omnivores.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

in what way are they symmetrical spuriousmonkey?

So we have a choice then? How do you want to live then?

p.s. one can question the word omnivore because this implies that we can eat anything or everything and we cant eat rocks. Surely the word Bi-vores would be more accurate

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

This topic is making me so hungry!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

1. It is wrong to electrocute a defenseless animals in order to make a coat for human use. If something is to be killed all of that creature should be used in order to thank and respect the animal.
2. I agree with your statement about the meat. It is stupid to say that you don't eat meat because you don't want to kill something. The fact is you must kill to live. Plant life is just as alive as animal life forms. I guess that is something stupid vegitarians didn't take into account in their philosophies. If a being doesn't have a face, doesn't cry out or physically move, does that mean it is any less alive. I think not. The bottom line is be it plant or animal matter, you kill to eat.

 

"Thank you cow, you made a very tasty porterhouse. I respect you so much that I am going to make a pair of leather boots out of your ass"

*Laughs*

Should we proportion what we use the animal for in respect of how much we want to thank it?

 

I dont like animal testing. Im okay with the following animals being tortured and killed for cosmetics though:

1. Hamsters.
2. Rats.
3. Bunnies.
4. Cats.
5. George Bush Jr.


.... Wait a minute!? Im against this thing all together.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

In what way? :bugeye:

 

<i>"Plant life is just as alive as animal life forms"</i>

I agree. Only thing is, plants can't run away and hide from predators.

 

No answers to my symmetrical arguement!?! Plus why are trees/plants symmetrical when they are first starting out and grow to become asymmetrical?? And doesnt symmetry imply design!??

 

<i>"No answers to my symmetrical arguement!?! "</i>


<i>"Plus why are trees/plants symmetrical when they are first starting out and grow to become asymmetrical??"</i>

All things seem to exibit physical balance--plants AND animals.

<i>"And doesnt symmetry imply design!??"</i>

I think life shapes itself inorder to find balance with its environment.

 

Sure you can. You may not receive any nutritional benefit, but they can certainly be consumed.

:m: Peace.

 

in what way would plants not be symmetrical. Did you ever look at a leave?


and omnivore might imply we can eat anything or everything, but technically it means that both vegetative and animal food is consumed. It's is just a technical term used to describe these eating habits. I learned this in elementary school, so i suspect that it is not a really esoteric word

(in the same way a herbivore doesn't mean that these animals eats all plants and trees.)

does symmertry imply design: is a snowflake symmetrical...yes...is it designed...no...

is life designed...yes...is there a designer....no...

 

Spurious monkey asked you to substantiate your claim:

Which you chose to ignore:

And now, SM has asked again…

:m: Peace.

 

i gave a partial answer...most parts of a plant are symmetrical..and often the entire thing is symmetrical...unless the growth pattern is somehow distorted and the symmetry is lost somewhat

 

It’s not your posts that are in question, SM. Neville made a claim that you challenged, and he has yet to address. I am just bringing that fact back into focus as he continues to ask why no one is responding to his “argument”.

:m: Peace.

 

i could then point out that a special thing that many animals share is bilateral symmetry...but not all...

 

just a point but we DO eat rocks

salt is a rock

also MUST consume minrals like iron

 

Posted by Bowser:

The balance a tree has is somewhat different to an animals. An animal is free to move around and so is balanced in its strusture/shape/form but a tree, even if it is not symmetrical, remains upright merely because it is stuck into the ground. There are trees which grow out of the ground at a 45 degree angle yet still remain upright for the reason given. How many animals legs are at 45 degrees to the earth?
By Spurious Monkey:

I am not just talking about bilateral symmetry. I am talking about symmetry in general. A worm is not bilateral yet it still has symmetry.
By Spurious Monkey:

It could be said that humans hands are virtually symmetrical. Even if this is not the case crabs claws are symmetrical and they still have a symmetrical form. Leaves may be symmetrical but most plants and trees are not. just have a look for yourself. Plus i had already mentioned the fact that their fruits and seeds are symmetrical such as an orange, but i was pointing out the fact that they are different from everything else on the planet. They begin symmetrical and grow to become asymmetrical. This is because their purpose is different: they are for food.
I would like to take this opportunity to point out that animals too have seeds (man and woman have seeds too) and so an while an orange is symmetrical this is not its actual seed. the seeds are within. This however does not change the fact that the orange itself is symmetrical but does show how different plants and trees are to other beings: Animals etc use their seeds to make a reproduction of their form which then grows, trees however use their seeds to make a completely different form which then grows but does not even follow a pattern. It will not look like its parent(s) in shape!
To the posters concerning rocks: Yes we can eat rocks just like we can eat certain berries which are poisonous to the human body. But rocks shouldnt be part of our diet and as such we are not omnivores. A herbivore can eat rocks too if it wishes just like it can eat animals if it so wished yet it doesnt which is why it is called a herbivore. A carnivore could eat plants too but it doesnt.A such an omnievore should eat everything, but it doesnt.
Salt and iron etc can be obtained from other sources: plants.
Posted By Spurious Monkey:

Are all snowflakes symmetrical? I know it was nice to make those pretty snowflakes out of paper at primary school but that doesnt make all snowflakes symmetrical. Even if they are it should be pointed out that snowflakes are just frozen water Spurious Monkey and it is the structure of water itself that should be look at here.
It is understood that you are saying that the process of a snowflake being made is one where there is no designer but which still produces symmetry, but in opposition it should be said that a snowflake is frozen water and the design of the water itself should be questioned.
By Spurious Monkey:

No they are not! Have a look for yourself. While it is understood that animals are not perfectly symmetrical ie there could be a mole on one side of the face, the basic form is. Trees and plants do not even have a shared form. They each grow independently to one another.

 

eating meat and using fur should not be a problem if it is done responsibly and in moderation.