This was not as good as I had hoped. It's not a very good argument video because you really didn't disprove the vegans arguments thoroughly. I came here thinking this would be funny. I'm a vegan but I HATE preachy vegans because what people eat is THEIR business. But dude, you didn't really disprove some of these claims. In fact, you didn't disprove the milk claims at all. I didn't see the quick note you put up though. Overall, vegans need to chill out and respect others but so do meat eaters
@mondezdurden: I think you get it. See, I tend to act the same way that these people do. This leads vegs to support them but not me, which I can then point out is hypocritical.
It would take a long time to tell people why The China Study is flawed due to what it builds on and the fact it uses correlation and not causation.
@BLHProductions well, lots of vegans are so because of their idea of morality and not so much health so they lose sight of the idea that morality is decided by societal norms and so it's not considered wrong to eat animals and considering there is no such thing as universal morality even though I personally feel I can't do it that does not then give me a right to attack anyone else's views on the matter. As for the china study, all apes do consume animal protein, but only humans eat more than 5%
So, there is something to be said that the modern human does not comply with how other apes eat or even how humans ate 1000 years ago. That said, it's not realistic to believe that people will stop eating large amounts of meat so we vegans should focus our energy or trying to make the slaughter of animals in factory farms as humane as possible instead of attacking people who choose to have a burger for lunch. To do what is attainable and not judge, not fight an impossible fight and act superior.
dude you should seriously check out what bio magification is and how the order of the consumer ( ecology) influences the amount of ( for example) heavy metals in its'tissue
@wlatrocks7: You mean how energy is lost as you go higher and how the farther up the food chain you go the more toxins you run into?
The problem with that is that most of the animals we eat are primary or secondary consumers. Cows, dear, and other herbivores are first, pigs and chickens are usually 2nd, and for chickens they are eating a lot of insects and seeds, so they are low.
As for fish you can eat smaller fish like anchovies or sardines, which are healthy and not as toxic.
dude i know you think what you eat is right.. but look at yourself. that must be so embarrassing. i mean isnt it? im 16 and the only meat i eat is fish. i havent eaten any sort of animal flesh in over a year. i have a six pack, i can run a mile in 6 minutes 30 seconds i can do 35 push ups and i dont even work out. im not thanking vegetarianism. but my diet is very cheap, delicious lol, and obviously healthy. i get every single nutrient i need. its easier to call you dumb but i think ur trollin
@7Trisanaty7: I never said that what I eat is right, though it could likely be if I exercised more. But eating meat doesn't make you fat, calories do.
Fish is meat, or as you say it, animal flesh. You are a pescetarian not a vegetarian.
You are young, but doing 35 pushups isn't a lot in all honesty. If you can run fast part is likely genetic. Michel Phelps eats meat and he's an Olympic athlete, others are vegans, so I doubt it matters much.
@7Trisanaty7: 35 might be fairly good in a minute, but it is nothing to brag about. And yes, I can do 1, and more. The one thing I can't do are pullups because I do not have upper body strength. But as I was saying, you eat meat, but you can be healthy not eating meat if you wish.
Your video was narrow minded and biased and you didn't make a point that the dairy fact was false you just copy pasted a article you read somewhere. Research can be paid by certain companies to prove certain facts. You can't argue that cows milk, elephant milk or donkey's milk isn't a odd thing to drink how about getting some suction cups on your on boobs and become self sufficient. There are more reasons to cut down meat consumption than animal rights, the environmental factors are alarming.
@persiannelya: Hmm, is it more narrow minded to point out flaws in a person's logic and say why it is or why you think so, or is it more narrow minded to tell someone they are narrow minded and biased because you just told them something they didn't want to hear?
I already addressed the milk thing in the comments. Basically the information tends to be from Campbell and his results are flawed.
@BLHProductions I'm not replying to this comment because it was jibberish and doesn't answer anything it's just some BS t help yourself feel better about your youtube rant.
@persiannelya: What you just said can be applied to anything, even veg sources who think it is immoral to eat meat.
I'm a male, so I am not adept at making milk. But look, milk is a good source of nutrients, I like it, and I have no moral objections to it. If you think about it, sex is also weird, but its how we reproduce. Anything can be weird, but rarity doesn't imply wrongness.
The environmental factors are due to factory farming and are not needed to raise animals.
@BLHProductions actually you can produce milk and there has been many men who have actively lactated. If you think about it why are we so connected to milk? how did it start?
Sex isn't weird it is how we reproduce we don't better ourselves by drinking another animals milk. Did you know that every year hundreds of baby cow get shot in the head hours after their birth because you like the taste of milk? there is always more to the issue when it comes to diets.
@persiannelya: I never said I couldn't, I said I was not adept at it, meaning not very good. Not to mention that a cow is a lot larger than a human and produces more milk.
Likely someone tried it, liked it, and started doing it. Just like we found out we could eat other things. This also is what happened with drugs.
Actually we can, see, it's nutritious, and even has whey, which helps fight cancer.
The males do. I have no problem with death though, however I don't eat veal.
@persiannelya: And of course, there is always that a problem with how we do something isn't cause to stop doing that, it's cause to fix it. I would not mind eating milk cows. They are pretty much just genetically altered to be adept at tasting good (via fat) or producing milk.
Veganism and vegetarianism would be just as harmful to animals. Do you know how many animals would die in the process of growing fruits, veggies and grains for the whole human population - 7 billion plus humans - to eat? A lot.
@Bluebelle9289 you have no way to measure that veganism would 'just as harmful' to animals,' and is obviously a self-serving that has no basis in reality. There is no universally accepted scale of harm, because there are no 'harm units.'. We use our best moral judgement. An industry that treats living beings as commodity and cogs in a production line is clearly more cruel than the incidental and accidental killing of a rodent on a field for a number of reasons. That rodent lead a natural life
Like the other vegan fundies, you dodge the question. Here it is again - Do you know how many animals would die in the process of growing fruits and veggies and grains for a population of 7 billion and counting humans? Do the math yourself.
@SuperAnimalDrummer: I don't think the omnivore diet has fundamentalism. It's pretty much the belief (or action) that you don't think it is wrong to eat animals.
Now a vegetarian or vegan diet does to an extent, but for the most part you have basic ideas that get added to. This is why so many atheists act dogmatic towards it when it simply means no belief in a divine being. You could believe in heaven and hell and be Atheist.
@BLHProductions I am not necessarily correct, but as far as I know, there isn't a "pain unit" such as we have for length (inches) or weight (pounds). That doesn't mean pain and suffering don't exist, and as such, there can be more pain or less pain, and can be observable. Pain is a universal, just not in units. Either you are in pain, or you aren't. All mammals share this, and to deny the pain of animals is intellectually dishonest.
@SuperAnimalDrummer: So if I understand you correctly, someone can't say that a veg diet is as or more harmful then a omnivore diet because we can't measure pain, but because suffering (AKA pain) exists, it can be said that a veg diet causes less pain then an omnivore diet.
This to me sounds like hypocrisy. You say pain can be seen when it suits you, but that you can't say one thing is similar to another.
@BLHProductions you are twisting my words. I am pointing out truths, universal truths. You feel pain, I feel pain. To make the statement that veganism will cause more animal suffering is unsubstantiated both because it is hypothetical and unmeasurable. Torture is more suffering than no torture. Factory Farming is torture for animals, because of its deviation from natural living characteristic to each animal, and the pain inflicted upon each animal. The absence of factory farming: less pain.
@SuperAnimalDrummer: No, I'm telling you how you sound. It sounds as if you are changing what you say depending on what it is in response to.
Harvesting plants kills animals. These animals may not be killed quickly though. They could be maimed and suffer for days. Now yes, if you compare this to a factory farm, the factory farm is worse. Although you can raise animals in a more humane way then a factory farm.
The absence of humans: drastically less pain. Absence of life: 0.
@BLHProductions I am not changing anything. I am trying to negotiate your points as best as possible, many of which are nonsensical, so I may come off as a little erratic, only because of this. You are talking of possibilities of animals being maimed by plowing machines, for which you have no research and no facts, and trying to compare that to factory farming, or the commoditization of living beings on a massive scale. You're argument is very weak.
@SuperAnimalDrummer: Ah, I see. Sorry, I get use to people knowing about this. The original argument goes that if you eat grass fed beef, you can kill less animals then eating an all plant diet. You can see one the the original articles here: freerepublic. com/focus/f-news/972951/posts and then use that to search about how people refute it.
@SuperAnimalDrummer: Now if we kill animals for food, we'll likely kill more then if we ate only plants, but I don't have a personal problem with the number or the killing. Vegs do, yet they tend to ignore that by eating a commercially obtained diet, they are killing animals in the process.
No. I think we shouldn't factory farm animals too. I just don't think it is morally wrong to kill an animal for food humanely.
As I said, you have the problem with killing, not me.
@SuperAnimalDrummer: If we can't say that veganism and vegetarianism is harmful to animals because there is no universal scale of harm then you also can't say that eating animals causes more harm. To do this would be hypocrisy.
Also, more then rodents are killed and they are not always killed instantly.
If you have a problem with animals dying, this is something you should take into account. If I grow my own food and eat humanely raised and slaughter animals I do less harm.
Your argument from 2:25 to 3:15 not only represents a misunderstanding of human nature, but it's "all or none" approach is inherently illogical. Of course a being existing has to be selfish, this is an inescapable reality. But what you're saying boils down to "duhhh, if you are going to hurt beings in some indirect way, no matter how small, you may as well go all the way and just torture them!" I like my existence and am aware of the fact that it is selfish, my goal should be to limit it.
@LIEPANEW: I address the nirvana fallacy that meat can never be humane (which is true) and also say that you can help animals better by eating humane meat (which is opinion). The part about meat being cheap because less people eat it though doesn't really work as factory farming makes it cheap and S&D doesn't really dictate the prices.
@LiePaNew count: The thing I am talking about is that vegs say you shouldn't eat meat because it will never be perfect. I say that a veg diet is also never going to be perfect. So if the first part is true, than the second part is also true, but neither are.
I think you are talking about improvement. However we can improve, and improve greatly, our treatment of animals. You don't have to stop eating meat, especially you you find nothing wrong with killing and eating animals.
@BLHProductions Can't you take that one step further and eliminate the practice altogether? What's the point of killing other sentient beings if you don't have to?
@LIEPANEW: Can't you take that one step further and eliminate the human race altogether? What's the point of causing suffering to other organisms and the planet if you don't have to?
@BLHProductions Did I not just emphasize the point that beings are inherently selfish, and that I place importance on the existence of human beings? However, being human doesn't give you a free pass to cause suffering since we cause suffering no matter what we do. While existing, we should limit suffering. Stop making erroneous comparisons. If some societies truly need meat to survive, I am not against that.
@LIEPANEW: So where do you draw the line and what gives you the right to draw it there? If you really want to reduce suffering, and you can't make that zero "no matter what we do," doesn't it seem logical, according to what you want, to not exist? After all, don't you consider eating meat selfish and thus something we shouldn't do?
We could always just not factory farm and treat animals well.
Having a computer can cause suffering. Should you not have one?
@BLHProductions You would have to try pretty damn hard to show how having a computer directly causes suffering. Sure it depletes resources... I wouldn't wish for other beings that harm others (carnivorous animals, etc.) not not exist. If you really think that vegans should logically have suicidal tendencies, then you're kidding yourself! Life on earth revolves around selfish ecosystems, which is a plain and simple fact. "Treating animals well" is hard to reinforce, that is wishful thinking.
Ha dude quit hatin on us veg's u kno we live longer and have less chance for cancer? Meat also causes impotency and genital shrinking which is big problem for u cuz ur gunna be dicklessXD
@crimses: Uh, no. I do not have vegs. See, I am attacking mostly attitudes and weak arguments in this video, the the people themselves simply for being vegs.
Once again, you have some misinformation. Vegs don't really live longer, but if they do, it might be 10 years, MIGHT! And a life is not judged with how long it is. Personally it is enjoyment and overall it is what you can accomplish. Wanting to help animals is fine, being a veg doesn't help animals...
@crimses count. ...because you are not saving any. Yes, if everyone was a veg you would, however that is like saying if everyone didn't murder people there would be no murders so by not murdering people, you save murder victims. Non-action is neutral, not good or bad.
And you get less types of cancer, you actually can get certain types of cancer more often, for instance, colorectal cancer.
@crimses count count: Veg diets have the tendency to make you deficient is some nutrients like Zinc, which can lead to impotency. Meat is high in Zinc and also Iron, which leads to a good sex life.
So let's move on to smaller penises. This is caused by phthalates, which was shown to be in chicken, but are also in plastics, so that water you drink could be in a bottle that causes you to be flaccid.
@crimses final: Oh, and let us not forget that water has the combined artificial estrogen of millions of women on birth control pills, which also causes smaller penises. In fact, sperm counts and penis sizes are down now adays, but it isn't because of meat. I am also not surprised to see that pretty much all of your claims are supported by PETA.
@BLHProductions yes being veg helps animals you just dont wanna admit your wrong XD just take the vid down...it offends alotta people even if they don't have tht attitude
@crimses: Yes, completely ignoring everything I said and not addressing anything really makes be wrong, and in case you didn't get it, that was sarcasm.
As I said, not eating animals and saying you save animals is like saying you help murder victims by not killing people. The animals are going to be killed and you can't say you save lives that don't exist.
What part of this video makes you think I care if people are offended? If they are, it's mostly because I said they were wrong.
@lessbeansplease: So your reasoning as to why I am dumb is to use facts...did you even think that through?
And its less that they disagree with me and more that about 30% of the arguments here are I am fat, thus stupid and ignorant. 60% of the arguments are "meat is immoral."
A personal attack is not a valid argument against someone.
@BLHProductions The facts you are using are incorrect about vegans and vegetarians, not that you are fat, You said that basically that we were dumb because plants take in chemicals like mercury, and SHelly said there are large doeses of mercury in fish, more than in plants. Just because the way we eat isn't perfect does not make it 'moral' to eat things that are just as bad and feel pain just like us.
@lessbeansplease: Care to be more specific or are you just going to do a broad "you are wrong" statement?
No, I said that the arguments used were flawed. Fish is bad because of pollution and plants also suck up pollution, so it isn't really a good argument. Besides, you can eat smaller fish if it bothers you.
Just because you find it immoral to eat meat doesn't mean it is immoral. And it's not a reason to eat meat, it's saying the argument is flawed that was used.
@marcluc1988: Actually, I never said that. What I said is that people who wanted to be a vegan or vegetarian were already going to become vegan or vegetarian. I went on to say that if you dismiss everyone you will never get anywhere fast. Engagement is what helps, that would be logical engagement, not "you rape and torture animals."
I mean, someone can be open minded while, and pay attention here, DISAGREEING WITH YOU.
FathomlessJoke: Two omnivorous apes who have evolved consciousness and the ability to argue with another ape in and endless debate over whether their consciousness takes away their right to consume the flesh of other animals. Just dawned on me how pointless this has been. It doesn't matter if the human whole world turns vegan or if it continues to eat both meat and plants. Nature won't judge us, only we can judge ourselves. Perhaps you should stop judging me, and I'll stop judging you.
@Xiphos0292 It does not offend or anger me that you result to hate. It is rather humorous however, since it is no coincidence perhaps that you wrote about primative beings while being so primative yourself. However, I am not sure you should feel very satisfied with such a substandard manner of discourse.
@Xiphos0292 "Just dawned on me how pointless this has been" While I don't expect one to shed religious beliefs and biases any time soon, I'm not so sure others who see a need for a change won't get something inspirational or informative to trigger a change. So, I am not prepared to say that I personally wasted a second of my time. If, however, you held out a sliver of hope that I'd embrace your lies and rape and torture animals with you and ingest rotting flesh, you wasted your time!
@FathomlessJoy Lol, you go on changing the world then. As long as you die with the perception that you have something to show for it, you'll die happy. But it will be just that - a perception. Still, good luck.
@Xiphos0292 "you go on changing the world then" I don't have to ask for your permission, but in case that it is blessing thank you! See to not do what is common to men, not follow tradition and cultural condition, to break out of biases and beliefs truly changes the consciouness of all of man, right?
@Xiphos0292 "As long as you die with the perception that you have something to show for it, you'll die happy." That is one of the many deep joys of ending ones torture of animals and the ingestation of rot and death: happiness, joy, right now, not tomorrow or when we die. There is a certain calm joy, a deep beauty in ones life when one puts his heart and mind into living rightly, and feeds and clothes himself humanely, decently, with dignity.
@Xiphos0292 "But it will be just that - a perception" That seems to be born of beliefs you have. Rather religious of you, if I may say.
Like I said, living rightly has its own reward, in the present, not tomorrow in death, but in living now. The health, the compassion, the appreciation of Earth and all her creatures, it is truly worth it whether anyone else does it or not. Of couse there are hundrends of millions of veg*ns today, and growing all the time.
@Xiphos0292 "It doesn't matter if the human whole world turns vegan or if it continues to eat both meat and plants" It matters to a lot of folks headed to open heart surgery or an early grave - your chance as a flesh eater to have a premature heart attack or stoke is 1 in 2, that is 50/50, brah.
.
It matters to billions of animals.
.
It matters to the human species, who needs fresh air and water. Right?
@Xiphos0292 "Nature won't judge us, only we can judge ourselves" And yet there are consequences to unsound actions in nature, right? They are all around us. If we pollute the soil, it can run off into water, which can harm children who drink it, and cause birth defects for future generations, and fish can be poised, upsetting natural order on Earth...those types of consequences.
@Xiphos0292 "Perhaps you should stop judging me, and I'll stop judging you." Are we judging anything? To have sound judgment we must observe. Have we observed anything? I thought we could look at the world anew, as men, and see for ourselves what is right, what is right for our health, our fitness, our planet's resources, for other species, for all the Earth. That is more meaningful than petty judgments.
Vegans have the right to their lifestyle, but the ones who try and spread their hilarious arguments and convince meat-eaters to "convert" are worthless, deluded fucks. The world will go on eating meat. I will go on eating meat, and I'll enjoy it. I'll go on consuming dairy products, and enjoy that too. I'll do those things, and I'll imagine eating them in front of vegans while laughing hysterically.
@Xiphos0292: Some arguments are better than others.
I agree that trying to convert others is wrong, but there is some validity in the health and environmental arguments that many omnivores do not think about. I think most of the problem though comes from talking about morality. If someone thinks it's not immoral to eat meat, no amount of weighted language will change that.
Someone being an ass to someone else won't help things though. Unless attacked, there is nothing to defend.
@Xiphos0292 It is my lifestyle to stay fit and healthy and not to rape and torture animals nor to eat their diseased rotting flesh. As a result of seeing all the society lies about raping and torturing sentient beings for pleasure, it is part of my lifestyle now to share the truth with others where ever I go, so that they too have a chance to step out of the ignorance, cruelty and sickness. Please respect my lifestyle!
@FathomlessJoy I would respect it if you didn't lie and vilify people who don't follow your lifestyle. If you really want to call yourself a vegan, try plowing a field for a day. When you're done, look at all the chopped up animal nests and body parts of mice and lizards, along with countless insects and smaller animals. I've seen it. How cute or human like does something have to be before you attach value to it? Hypocrisy at its finest.
@Xiphos0292 LOL No, I was giving your silly argument of lifestyle and tolerance right back at you. Tolerate my lifestyle of shouting from the rooftops that it is inhumane to enslave and torture animals for pleasure and unhealthy to ingest their diseased rotting flesh. Tolerate this!
@FathomlessJoy I won't tolerate a lifestyle that is hypocritical. But I will tolerate vegans who adhere to their lifestyle, but don't desperately try to convince other people to change for ethical reasons they themselves are not even safe from.
@Xiphos0292 "I won't tolerate a lifestyle that is hypocritical" Oh, so you get to say then who gets tolerated and who doesn't, whose lifestyle is right and whose isn't, right? Well vegans generally see the death, sickness, and disease of the common way society lives. It is our "lifestyle" to evolve away from that and we generally spend a lot of time educating others as to the harm being done. Again, tolerate this!
@Xiphos0292 "But I will tolerate vegans who adhere to their lifestyle" You just claimed that there was no such thing as a vegan. Again, you can't have it all ways.
@Xiphos0292 "but don't desperately try to convince other people to change for ethical reasons they themselves are not even safe from." Ethics don't even factor into it. We are talking about facts, not morals or ethics. In fact some of the most moral and ethical peeps in the world are those who are committing all manner of autrocity, including the cruel rape and torture of sentient beings and the spreading of deception that the behavior is acceptable.
@FathomlessJoy: Actually he's right. Animals are killed by the harvesting process. Besides that the vegan products you eat contain animal parts from insects mice.
Speciesist and a very over inflated term to try and apply the same apprehension to eating animals as we have for racists and sexist, but the problem is that woman and men are equal as well as people of the same race. But a cow and a chicken are not equal to each other.
@Xiphos0292 "try plowing a field for a day" I grow my own organic gardens and fruit trees, thanks! Two problems with your argument, other than it is generally dull and childish. 1) surely you know the majority of crops are fed to the tens of billions of livestock animals, right? Thus you are the contributer of crop deaths, 2) Incidental harm to animals, which may or may not be true, by no means absolves you of the rape and torture you intentionally inflict every day, right?
@FathomlessJoy: Two problems with your arguments. 1) Feeding crops to animals is a symptom of greed which goes with our horrible treatment of the animals we eat. We can, however, not feed them crops we can eat and treat them humanely.
2) Intent doesn't matter if your goal is to not kill and/or maim animals. Also, you are the one with the problem with killing animals, I simply don't think we should cruelly raise and kill them.
@BLHProductions "We can, however, not feed them crops we can eat and treat them humanely." That's unprecedented. Let's assume for a moment we could find a way to enslave an animal humanely, which is ridiculous on its face, we would still need a way to feed tens of billions of extra mouths. What, destroy more forests? There is no other Amazon rainforest to use. We are doing it the only way we can meet demand for maximize profit. The solution is clear: refuse to participate!
@FathomlessJoy: Or we could cut down on how much meat we eat and use animals as a way to save up for times when there is a doubt and as a way to turn waste products into food products, and/or hunt.
It's like with cars. We could get rid of them or we could continue to create better quality vehicles that are environmentally friendly.
By the way, think you could refrain for weighted language like slavery? It makes it hard to take you seriously.
@BLHProductions Those are all ways of reform, which is the way of the politician, right? But have you ever tried to talk a rotting flesh eater into cutting down? LOL Clearly you have not. Let me tell ya, John Q Corpsemunch is simply not cutting down but speeding.
@FathomlessJoy: "Let me tell ya, John Q Corpsemunch is simply not cutting down but speeding."
Which is where eating humane meat by a larger market comes in. If you can charge more for humane meat, less money is lost and more businesses would raise animals better so that they would stay in business. Even more so if humane meat tastes better.
@BLHProductions "Which is where eating humane meat by a larger market comes in" We have humane meat already, it is called fruits and vegetables, nuts, seeds, legumes, berries. Mmm. Healthy too. You should try them, for many reasons. Experiement, learn, see what you find out.
@BLHProductions This lazy reasoning is essentially why you want to force me to change my language (rape, torture, enslavement, etc). You know so long as it is seen fundamently for exactly what it is, your silly idea of "humane meat" is exposed for the fraud that it is, right out of the gait.
I don't demand that every cage be comfortable, but rather that every cage be empty.
@BLHProductions "Which is where eating humane meat " The first thing that corrupt, cruel oppressors do is change the language, brother. So long as the corrupt man can get the world to describe a lie in favorable terms, he can keep every generation believing it! Unless one refuses to participate. See I would rather die than accept the lies of oppression.
@BLHProductions "weighted language like slavery" What are you talking about? Can you see reality? I am a man, I have seen things with my own eyes, not the eyes of the priests, parents, politicians, or profiteers. As such I do not use language that makes you feel good about yourself; I tell it the way it is. Those poor thinking, feeling beings are raped and tortured 24/7 for you to get your Burger King on. That is a fact. The only solution: see reality and refuse to participate.
@FathomlessJoy: Using slavery when taking about raising animals is using language that is emotionally charged.
Do you enjoy sex?
Do you enjoy pushing an oddly shaped organ against another person's oddly shaped organ just so pleasure what runs a risk of getting a disease that might cause your death?
Both of these are asking the same thing, but one is more or less neutral, the other has negative emotion attached to it.
Would you rather eat only plants or eat tasty humanely raised steak with mouthwatering side dishes?
You don't have to. You can said slaughter, killing, gutting, etc. But when you say enslavement, rape, and torture you use weighted language that I for one, do not respond to. I see what you are doing and I begin to stop taking you seriously because once you try to use emotion, the logic part tends to be over with.
@BLHProductions "Using slavery when taking about raising animals is using language that is emotionally charged." You are in denial. You need to watch Earthlings. This is not isolated, it is systemic, and it is real, and it is every day. watch?v=FHA4HNbmDLg
@BLHProductions "Both of these are asking the same thing, but one is more or less neutral, the other has negative emotion attached to it." We don't have to invent euphemisms for sex to realize what it is, right? Not there are not lots of names folks call it, but neither of us denies that the very act itself exists and paints up the language so as not to face this fact, right?
@FathomlessJoy: Seems to be if we cut down on greed we could solve most of the problems.
After all, why would a company listen to someone who has chosen to never again by their products for any reason? If you are a customer shopping somewhere else, you have a louder voice.
@BLHProductions "Seems to be if we cut down on greed we could solve most of the problems." Sure, and where do we start? See greed is not some abstract concept out there somewhere, Greed is you and me, it is in the society we construct together, right? So, again, what action can a lowly individual take? Advocate to reform a fundamentally corrupt way of life? Propose modifications? Again, that is silliness for politicians. Refuse to participate and take your life back!
@FathomlessJoy: Are you really saying that my argument is invalid because it is going to be hard to do?
You can say this is silliness for politicians but you are not going to stop something that is legal or laws that are easier to ignore and pay a small fine than to follow with yelling at people on the internet and calling them a horrible person.
I think I'm don't talking to you now until you get your shit together.
@BLHProductions I am saying that your argument is invalid foremost because it is an argument. We do not learn to solve anything by argumentation. When the arguments cease, and observation takes place, problems may be solved.
Rationally, however, your argument is invalid because you attempt in vain to reform something that's fundamentally flawed. It is like re-building a house on a cracked foundation, you never end up with a sound structure regardless of your carpentry skills.
@BLHProductions "You can say this is silliness for politicians" Is that not what politicians do? They tells us that they will reform education, they will reform healthcare, they will reform welfare, economic policy, foreign policy, etc, etc. Constantly trying to reform that which is fundamentally flawed. And how long have they argued about the best way to reform it? Thousands of years. What has ever happned? A new face on the same problems. Run for office, youll fit right in!!
@BLHProductions "but you are not going to stop something that is legal " Is your claim that what I am saying is false because it is difficult to achieve? LOL
Look, I do stop it everyday. Refusing to participate in it changes all of mankind. All it takes it 1 person to change humanity. Look at Hitler. Say what you want, but brother changed the effing world! Hitler changed the consciousness of mankind. One man! Think of what a handful of healthy, sane, compassionate men could do!
@BLHProductions "I think I'm don't talking to you now until you get your shit together." Hey either you have the rocks to hang or you don't ;)
But, remember, it is very basic to know how to treat others, to refuse to cause suffering to others, to understand what healthy food is, to understand how to look at life as a whole. It is very basic. If we don't have those things, what do we have? Politics? LMAO!
@BLHProductions "After all, why would a company listen to someone who has chosen to never again by their products for any reason?" I am not talking to companies. There is no way I can change them, they are already gone, corrupt, they are making piles of money and don't care what you or I think. I step out of their sickness by refusing to participate. But that is not my primary objective. My intent is to live as healthy as possible, to have a sensitive, healthy mind and body.
@BLHProductions "If you are a customer shopping somewhere else, you have a louder voice." But we should not only focus on a couple facets: the greed and cruelty. We have to look at this holistically, from all its angles: health, the environment, humane treatment of others, compassion for others, fitness, ecology, honesty. When we are not tethered to a belief or preference just poking at a few parts of it, but rather we look at this thing as a whole, the answer is crystal clear.
@BLHProductions "Intent doesn't matter if your goal is to not kill and/or maim animals" My goal is to do the least harm possible. Raping and torturing animals for petty pleasure, while destroying our water and air and human health is doing the maximum harm. There is a significant difference.
But, closer to the heart of it, why do you offer this argument? Is it not because you do not want to change, that you are afraid to lose your petty pleasures, that you advance such silliness?
@FathomlessJoy: Ah, in that cause you have one of two options. A) Suicide which will save countless more lives and take one, or B) Choose to not have any offspring, no harm will come to them and they cannot do harm to others. I recommend B, have you looked into the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement?
@FathomlessJoy: I offer this argument because your goal is not being accomplished by your actions or words. See, your pretty much saying that unnecessary is what I do, not what you do for the sole reason that you do not have a problem with what you do. Any harm you do is necessary harm, no matter how more extravagant it may be.
@BLHProductions Again, I think you are trying to pass cleverness off as truth. It is a cheap knockoff.
I did not say I was perfect, not that I can control other humans, even my offspring. But I can quick calling things in the language of lies, quit belieing like a religious fanatic, quit poisoning my body like an ignorant child and minimize any harm others make have because of my existence. One is a way too minimize, yours is a way to maximize harm.
@BLHProductions "A) ... or B) " Actually, have you considered that there is a way to take action in society without participating in it? If you'd stop arguing mindlessly for a single minute you would be able to see that your options are small, those really don't do anything, and you'd perhaps have a chance to consider another way. Sad.
@BLHProductions "I simply don't think we should cruelly raise and kill them." Then do something about it! Start by not participating in it. So long as you derive pleasure from something, you are responsible for the consequences. You do not have to participate and all these arguments you proffer are merely distractions to continue in the common, lazy way.
@FathomlessJoy: Not participating will not help the factory farms, but it will will also not help the good farms. I have to problems with the good farms. I think a mixture of buying humanely raise meat and eating meat that was caught and killed by people I know through hunting (I would include fishing, but I don't like the taste of fish) would be a better thing to do, for me at least.
You have a problem with killing animals, so you don't have to eat meat if you don't want to.
@FathomlessJoy: But let's move on to the rest of what you said.
"So long as you derive pleasure from something, you are responsible for the consequences." So that would mean if you obtained pleasure because you were raped, you, the rape victim, are responsible? It would also mean that if no pleasure was obtained from killing a human, the killer would not be responsible.
@FathomlessJoy: Neither do you have to. I participate because I wish to. I will likely never convince you of anything I believe, and that's alright. The act of engaging with you is enough. People who stay among people with the same ideals as themselves, after a while, are doing nothing more than stroking their egos and exchanging stories about the other side using dumb or horrible arguments.
Commonality does not imply wrongness any more than new implies correctness.
@Xiphos0292 "I've seen it" You have no proof of that, right?
Here is 100% proof of the exploitation, enslavement, rape and torture of innocent animals so that relatively rich, extremely selfish folks can eat bacon cheeseburgers and chicken wings: watch?v=FHA4HNbmDLg
@Xiphos0292 "mice and lizards, along with countless insects and smaller animals." I love and respect all of Earth's creatures. Do you? If so, it seems we would stop the systemic rape and torture of innocent sentient beings for petty pleasure of eating their rotting flesh. I am glad you seem to care about animals. Here are things you can do to learn:
@FathomlessJoy: I do not eat rotten flesh. In fact, very few people in the world eat rotten flesh of animals. That being said, if done correctly, you can eat rotten flesh or animals, which is usually a fish, because the meat isn't what harms you, it's the bacteria.
@FathomlessJoy You continue to use the words "rape" and "torture" yet choose to ignore the fact that some farms are working to improve the treatment of livestock animals, and more still DO treat animals with respect and minimize suffering when slaughtering them. I respect Earth's creatures, yes: and I am one of them. I also respect the ecological role of these animals, which they would cease to have if humans simply stopped raising and killing them for food.
@Xiphos0292 "You continue to use the words "rape" and "torture"" Because that is what takes place, right? Those sentient beings are enslave, raped and torture so that you can eat their rotting parts. If we remove the euphemisms from our language and see things simply, we have a much better shot at seeing reality.
@Xiphos0292 "choose to ignore the fact that some farms are working to improve the treatment of livestock animals" So they see what we are talking about? Nope! There goal is profit and they think they can dupe you into buying the more expensive product by painting it up prettier than the rest. That is naive.
@Xiphos0292 "I respect Earth's creatures, yes: and I am one of them" This is the most important thing you said. Looking past eating animals for a moment, we all share this Earth. We are all on here together, the animals, plants, everyone. We share the same water, air, land, all of us. It is time for man to learn not to destroy the Earth that we all share, and to end the exploitation and enslavement of every species, including his own.
@Xiphos0292 "which they would cease to have if humans simply stopped raising and killing them for food." Oh so the slave owners are doing the slaves a favor, is that it? That veal calf ripped from its raped mama so that humans can still his food actually owes the few weeks of its tortured life to the man who brutalized it. Is that it? You sure you want to charge up this hill and make that stand?
@Xiphos0292 "I also respect the ecological role of these animals, which they would cease to have if humans simply stopped raising and killing them for food." Looking past the twisted mind to invent such a rationalization, you will be happy to know that grazing livestock have shown to reverse desertification in certain parts of the famished world. Therefore, with a little hard work, we could quickly transport these animals to happy, productive, FREE lives in this world once again.
Pollution in the soil is different in that the soil and rain filter and cleanse, therefore the vegatable does not take the toxins, if they are any, directly. With fish, however, polluted water is washed inside and outside of their bodies ever moment of every day. This causes the toxins to reside in their bodies, in the organs, in their muscles, fat. She's not a scientist that proves what she is saying...
Check this out: cbsnews.com/stories/2004/11/22/tech/main657105.shtml
@FathomlessJoy: Pollution from humans. Which was my main point. Fish is not as healthy for you as it was because we pollute the planet. That pollution is also from chemical and organic runoff from crops, and of course you have the meat industry and most other industries in one way of another.
@BLHProductions "Fish is not as healthy for you as it was because we pollute the planet" Yep! So, factor this fact you noted with the facts that fish has LDL cholesterol, saturated fat, single source animal protein that is a toxin to the body, and that when cooked it is carcinogenic...oh, and that it is rotting death, it is a no brainer: consuming fish is sick and unhealthy.
@BLHProductions "That pollution is also from chemical and organic runoff from crops" Agreed! Of course you do know where most food crops go? They go to unnaturally and unhealthily fattening livestock for slaughter. This means that to solve the problem of crop pollution our task is infinitely more complex, with tens of billions of extra mouths to feed. So solve the problem it has to be simplified: get rid of the tens of billions of mouths that eat those crops and we have a chance.
@BLHProductions "and of course you have the meat industry " Which eats most of the crops, and poisons most of the air. Where do you think 30 billions pig, cow and chicken carcasses go? Think about it; they are burned and dumped into our soil/water. Think about how many peeps are in the world, and realize that the 7 billion people are a fraction of the livestock animals slaughtered every year, which is set to double in 15 years! This makes a tough problem an impossible challenge.
@BLHProductions But hey, maybe you can run for political office one day: those guys LOVE to argue endlessly about the problems and never take action to solve them!
I am not sure if you realize how hateful and emotionaly unstable and unintelligent you come off here. It is really quite embarrassing for you. I am sure you are smart and reasonable and good-humored off camera, but on here...not so much!
@FathomlessJoy: I'm not sure you realize how hypocritical you seem when you say I am hateful but say nothing about "Meat eaters are retarded..." It is really quite embarrassing for you.
I am trying to be entertaining you know. That's why in the comments I am less "in your face" about things.
@BLHProductions ""Meat eaters are retarded..." I was commenting on your vid, not hers. Nice attempt to deflect, which tells me you are at least somewhat aware of what I am saying, but if you cannot withstand public comments on your video content, perhaps you are better off not upping them.
@BLHProductions "It is really quite embarrassing for you." And yet I am not here flailing my arms, parading my obesity, while ranting about what I know about bio-chemisty, barely able to put two thoughts together. I think you think your argumentation is far more credible and astute than it actually is.
"I am trying to be entertaining you know" And yet you have no idea the kind of ass you make of yourself. Don't look now, but "that guy" you mock as a clueless idiot, is now you ;P
Dr. T. Colin Campbell never claimed that dairy causes cancer. He proved, however, casein makes cancer grow; removing the casein makes it stop. The turmors were already there, dairy products make them grow. watch?v=yfsT-qYeqGM <-- I know the title of this vid is misleading: "Meat and Dairy Cause Cancer'" but that's not what Dr. Campbell claims therein.
.
If you're going to be so smug in your "debunking," you should shed the hysteria and actually examine what you're saying.
@FathomlessJoy: That may be true, however, it only promoted cancer when it was extracted and in a situation where there was a higher amount of aflatoxin than you could consume while eating contaminated food.
When a more real world number was used in a study on monkeys and not mice, the opposite was true, low casein got cancer and high casein were fine. Oh, and the low casein but high aflatoxin mice had a 50% mortality rate where high protein didn't.
@FathomlessJoy: I didn't lie. I was talking about aflatoxin and casein, which is what the experiment was about. The problem is that lower and more real world aflatoxin levels saw the LOWER casein level animals get cancer where the HIGHER casein level animals did not. Cambell's study say the higher casein animals get cancer, but about half the lower casein level animals diet. 30 animals vs 16, more or less.
This is the study that Cambell was inspired by: ncbi.nlm.nih. gov/pubmed/4294825
You'll notice that about half the mice for the low protein group died.
This is a newer study using more real world levels of aflatoxin which saw liver damage in the low protein group: informahealthcare. com/doi/abs/10.3109/15569548909059756
@FathomlessJoy: Actual it was more protein is bad for you, which of course isn't true. In Campbell's study and the Indian study (from India) the low protein mice had a higher mortality rate.
So yes, if I have to choose between a 0 mortality rate and cancer vs a 50% mortality rate, due to the assault of aflatoxin on the liver, but no cancer, I think I'll take the casein. BTW, whey, also in milk, has been shown to be a hinder the growth of cancer.
@BLHProductions That is a lot of argument you have to go through just to know what to eat. I do not think I was put here to spend my time with that type of complexity to convince myself it is ok to rape and torture innocent, peaceful, sentient beings for petty pleasure. I pick an apple and eat it. No one gets hurt, the ecosystem thrives, and my body is healthy, whole, sane. Simple.
Do you project your own self loathing on the world? Is that why you are so violently hateful?Guess what, as much contempt you show others, it will not be correct action in your life, it will not get you in shape, it will not cause you to see how to live healthily, it will not purge lies and hate from your twisted mind and heart.
How am I violently hateful? See, you don't seem to grasp that I tend to take on the same tone of the people I am responding to, although it is usually a bit less direct than they are.
So I find it a bit hypocritical that you attack only me and leave the vegs alone. Though, I'm pretty sure I know why. I disagree with what you believe and they don't. Thus they are forgiven and I'm just a fat asshole on the internet.
@BLHProductions "How am I violently hateful?" Again, I can only go by how you present yourself in public. You may very well be peaceful, calm, serene, rational in private. But here you wave your arms about and shake your head like a mad man, pacing and mocking and frothing with a bitter, vindictive tone. Maybe you are just a really, really, good actor.
@BLHProductions "hypocritical that you attack only me and leave the vegs alone. " I'm not attacking you; I'm trying to save your life, a life that you clearly do not even respect yourself. Now I have no problem letting vegetarians know the evil that goes on to get eggs and dairy on their plates. Nor do I support like a cult worshiper everything every vegan says. I do fundamently share with most vegans (not all!) a care and love of life, health, the planet, and all her creatures.
@BLHProductions "See, you don't seem to grasp that I tend to take on the same tone of the people I am responding to" Thereby accomplishing what? Be true to yourself, man! Stop being a puppet or using others as scapegoats or excuses. You are truly the only thing you have in this world, ever. Your mind, body, heart, spirit is the only thing you can ever truly know in your entire life. Respect and love yourself and stop using others as a reason to act in ways you are not proud of.
@BLHProductions "I disagree with what you believe " What that enslavement, rape and torture of sentient beings is cruel and ignorant, unbefitting intelligent humans? That eating diseased rotting animal carcasses is unhealthy and sick? We don't have to believe anything to see the truth of those things, all we have to do is pay attention. See things for ourselves and not just mindless repeat the lies of others. Achtung, baby!
If you don't want to present yourself to the public as a fat, arrogant, sexist ass: don't call intelligent grown women, "Sweetie, sweetie, sweetie." Oh...and lose all the excess body fat...and the arrogance!
The good news: your weight and lack of health and hateful attitude and dull mind are the BEST testimony for others NOT eating and living the way you do. So, keep it up! :)
I'm being condescending to the person who has a condescending voice and is being condescending.
You do realize you are being arrogant yourself right?
And the first woman having to quit being a veg after 20 years due to health reasons is the BEST testimony for others NOT eating and living the way she does. So, if we take all you said, and apply it here, it would mean that no one should be a veg.
@Mongodelight: The China Study is based on a flawed study. That study was to test the effects of casein of rats. The problem is with the original and Cambell's study is that about half the low protein rats died, so while the high protein rats got cancer, the survival rate was higher for them. The toxin used was also extremely and the high. Tests were done on monkeys with more reasonable toxicity levels and the high protein monkeys were healthy and the low protein had cancer.
@MongoDelight count: This was accounted for because those animals with high casein levels could detoxify the aflatoxin but the detoxified product can promote cancer which casein may act, in a separated form, as a growth promoter for cancer, but the toxin is the root cause still. For low protein but high aflatoxin, the liver cells die too quickly to get cancer, which is why you have a high mortality rate.
@MongoDelight count count: Now when the level is lower at a more natural level, the low protein group cannot detoxify aflatoxin still but the cells don't die as quickly as they are formed, so cancer is the effect of this. With higher casein levels, the aflatoxin is safely detoxified and gotten rid of, which wasn't possible with the super high levels of aflatoxin.
Rats getting cancer with high protein is where you get "protein causes cancer." But it's flawed as I have said.
Ever been to voraciouseats?Great site.Written by vegan, and very humbling to vegans. ot insulting, like I said, site creator is vegan.The writer was a super preachy vegan,but soon got a medical problem that made her need to start eating meat.. Not everyone can be vegan, there is no one size fits all diet. One mans medicine is another mans poison, as they say in some European country.
@mondezdurden: This is dated.
BLHProductions 2 weeks ago
This was not as good as I had hoped. It's not a very good argument video because you really didn't disprove the vegans arguments thoroughly. I came here thinking this would be funny. I'm a vegan but I HATE preachy vegans because what people eat is THEIR business. But dude, you didn't really disprove some of these claims. In fact, you didn't disprove the milk claims at all. I didn't see the quick note you put up though. Overall, vegans need to chill out and respect others but so do meat eaters
mondezdurden 3 weeks ago
@mondezdurden: I think you get it. See, I tend to act the same way that these people do. This leads vegs to support them but not me, which I can then point out is hypocritical.
It would take a long time to tell people why The China Study is flawed due to what it builds on and the fact it uses correlation and not causation.
BLHProductions 3 weeks ago
@BLHProductions well, lots of vegans are so because of their idea of morality and not so much health so they lose sight of the idea that morality is decided by societal norms and so it's not considered wrong to eat animals and considering there is no such thing as universal morality even though I personally feel I can't do it that does not then give me a right to attack anyone else's views on the matter. As for the china study, all apes do consume animal protein, but only humans eat more than 5%
mondezdurden 2 weeks ago
So, there is something to be said that the modern human does not comply with how other apes eat or even how humans ate 1000 years ago. That said, it's not realistic to believe that people will stop eating large amounts of meat so we vegans should focus our energy or trying to make the slaughter of animals in factory farms as humane as possible instead of attacking people who choose to have a burger for lunch. To do what is attainable and not judge, not fight an impossible fight and act superior.
mondezdurden 2 weeks ago
@TierFilms: Really? How did I do that?
BLHProductions 1 month ago
dude you should seriously check out what bio magification is and how the order of the consumer ( ecology) influences the amount of ( for example) heavy metals in its'tissue
wlatrocks7 1 month ago
@wlatrocks7: You mean how energy is lost as you go higher and how the farther up the food chain you go the more toxins you run into?
The problem with that is that most of the animals we eat are primary or secondary consumers. Cows, dear, and other herbivores are first, pigs and chickens are usually 2nd, and for chickens they are eating a lot of insects and seeds, so they are low.
As for fish you can eat smaller fish like anchovies or sardines, which are healthy and not as toxic.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
dude i know you think what you eat is right.. but look at yourself. that must be so embarrassing. i mean isnt it? im 16 and the only meat i eat is fish. i havent eaten any sort of animal flesh in over a year. i have a six pack, i can run a mile in 6 minutes 30 seconds i can do 35 push ups and i dont even work out. im not thanking vegetarianism. but my diet is very cheap, delicious lol, and obviously healthy. i get every single nutrient i need. its easier to call you dumb but i think ur trollin
7Trisanaty7 1 month ago
@7Trisanaty7: I never said that what I eat is right, though it could likely be if I exercised more. But eating meat doesn't make you fat, calories do.
Fish is meat, or as you say it, animal flesh. You are a pescetarian not a vegetarian.
You are young, but doing 35 pushups isn't a lot in all honesty. If you can run fast part is likely genetic. Michel Phelps eats meat and he's an Olympic athlete, others are vegans, so I doubt it matters much.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions 35 is plenty for good form. as if youd know. can you do 1? lol
7Trisanaty7 1 month ago
@7Trisanaty7: 35 might be fairly good in a minute, but it is nothing to brag about. And yes, I can do 1, and more. The one thing I can't do are pullups because I do not have upper body strength. But as I was saying, you eat meat, but you can be healthy not eating meat if you wish.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
Your mic sucks, get a new one.
EmperorFishFinger 1 month ago
Your video was narrow minded and biased and you didn't make a point that the dairy fact was false you just copy pasted a article you read somewhere. Research can be paid by certain companies to prove certain facts. You can't argue that cows milk, elephant milk or donkey's milk isn't a odd thing to drink how about getting some suction cups on your on boobs and become self sufficient. There are more reasons to cut down meat consumption than animal rights, the environmental factors are alarming.
persiannelya 1 month ago
@persiannelya: Hmm, is it more narrow minded to point out flaws in a person's logic and say why it is or why you think so, or is it more narrow minded to tell someone they are narrow minded and biased because you just told them something they didn't want to hear?
I already addressed the milk thing in the comments. Basically the information tends to be from Campbell and his results are flawed.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions I'm not replying to this comment because it was jibberish and doesn't answer anything it's just some BS t help yourself feel better about your youtube rant.
persiannelya 1 month ago
@persiannelya: What you just said can be applied to anything, even veg sources who think it is immoral to eat meat.
I'm a male, so I am not adept at making milk. But look, milk is a good source of nutrients, I like it, and I have no moral objections to it. If you think about it, sex is also weird, but its how we reproduce. Anything can be weird, but rarity doesn't imply wrongness.
The environmental factors are due to factory farming and are not needed to raise animals.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions actually you can produce milk and there has been many men who have actively lactated. If you think about it why are we so connected to milk? how did it start?
Sex isn't weird it is how we reproduce we don't better ourselves by drinking another animals milk. Did you know that every year hundreds of baby cow get shot in the head hours after their birth because you like the taste of milk? there is always more to the issue when it comes to diets.
persiannelya 1 month ago
@persiannelya: I never said I couldn't, I said I was not adept at it, meaning not very good. Not to mention that a cow is a lot larger than a human and produces more milk.
Likely someone tried it, liked it, and started doing it. Just like we found out we could eat other things. This also is what happened with drugs.
Actually we can, see, it's nutritious, and even has whey, which helps fight cancer.
The males do. I have no problem with death though, however I don't eat veal.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@persiannelya: And of course, there is always that a problem with how we do something isn't cause to stop doing that, it's cause to fix it. I would not mind eating milk cows. They are pretty much just genetically altered to be adept at tasting good (via fat) or producing milk.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@persiannelya
Veganism and vegetarianism would be just as harmful to animals. Do you know how many animals would die in the process of growing fruits, veggies and grains for the whole human population - 7 billion plus humans - to eat? A lot.
Bluebelle9289 1 month ago
@Bluebelle9289 you have no way to measure that veganism would 'just as harmful' to animals,' and is obviously a self-serving that has no basis in reality. There is no universally accepted scale of harm, because there are no 'harm units.'. We use our best moral judgement. An industry that treats living beings as commodity and cogs in a production line is clearly more cruel than the incidental and accidental killing of a rodent on a field for a number of reasons. That rodent lead a natural life
SuperAnimalDrummer 1 month ago
@SuperAnimalDrummer
Like the other vegan fundies, you dodge the question. Here it is again - Do you know how many animals would die in the process of growing fruits and veggies and grains for a population of 7 billion and counting humans? Do the math yourself.
Bluebelle9289 1 month ago
@Bluebelle9289 like the other omni fundies, you pose a dumb question. there is no math to be done. it is unknowable.
SuperAnimalDrummer 1 month ago
@SuperAnimalDrummer: I don't think the omnivore diet has fundamentalism. It's pretty much the belief (or action) that you don't think it is wrong to eat animals.
Now a vegetarian or vegan diet does to an extent, but for the most part you have basic ideas that get added to. This is why so many atheists act dogmatic towards it when it simply means no belief in a divine being. You could believe in heaven and hell and be Atheist.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions I am not necessarily correct, but as far as I know, there isn't a "pain unit" such as we have for length (inches) or weight (pounds). That doesn't mean pain and suffering don't exist, and as such, there can be more pain or less pain, and can be observable. Pain is a universal, just not in units. Either you are in pain, or you aren't. All mammals share this, and to deny the pain of animals is intellectually dishonest.
SuperAnimalDrummer 1 month ago
@SuperAnimalDrummer: So if I understand you correctly, someone can't say that a veg diet is as or more harmful then a omnivore diet because we can't measure pain, but because suffering (AKA pain) exists, it can be said that a veg diet causes less pain then an omnivore diet.
This to me sounds like hypocrisy. You say pain can be seen when it suits you, but that you can't say one thing is similar to another.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions you are twisting my words. I am pointing out truths, universal truths. You feel pain, I feel pain. To make the statement that veganism will cause more animal suffering is unsubstantiated both because it is hypothetical and unmeasurable. Torture is more suffering than no torture. Factory Farming is torture for animals, because of its deviation from natural living characteristic to each animal, and the pain inflicted upon each animal. The absence of factory farming: less pain.
SuperAnimalDrummer 1 month ago
@SuperAnimalDrummer: No, I'm telling you how you sound. It sounds as if you are changing what you say depending on what it is in response to.
Harvesting plants kills animals. These animals may not be killed quickly though. They could be maimed and suffer for days. Now yes, if you compare this to a factory farm, the factory farm is worse. Although you can raise animals in a more humane way then a factory farm.
The absence of humans: drastically less pain. Absence of life: 0.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions I am not changing anything. I am trying to negotiate your points as best as possible, many of which are nonsensical, so I may come off as a little erratic, only because of this. You are talking of possibilities of animals being maimed by plowing machines, for which you have no research and no facts, and trying to compare that to factory farming, or the commoditization of living beings on a massive scale. You're argument is very weak.
SuperAnimalDrummer 1 month ago
@SuperAnimalDrummer: Ah, I see. Sorry, I get use to people knowing about this. The original argument goes that if you eat grass fed beef, you can kill less animals then eating an all plant diet. You can see one the the original articles here: freerepublic. com/focus/f-news/972951/posts and then use that to search about how people refute it.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@SuperAnimalDrummer: Now if we kill animals for food, we'll likely kill more then if we ate only plants, but I don't have a personal problem with the number or the killing. Vegs do, yet they tend to ignore that by eating a commercially obtained diet, they are killing animals in the process.
No. I think we shouldn't factory farm animals too. I just don't think it is morally wrong to kill an animal for food humanely.
As I said, you have the problem with killing, not me.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@SuperAnimalDrummer
You're twisting your own words. Word of advice, quit while you're ahead less you sound even more ridiculous and embarrass yourself further.
Bluebelle9289 1 month ago
@SuperAnimalDrummer
Uh huh. Nice fail. When you're ready to smarten up and mature, I'll be waiting.
Bluebelle9289 1 month ago
@Bluebelle9289 you reply twice without making a counterpoint, only to claim I am twisting my words and to warn of further embarrassment. I am shaken.
SuperAnimalDrummer 1 month ago
@SuperAnimalDrummer: If we can't say that veganism and vegetarianism is harmful to animals because there is no universal scale of harm then you also can't say that eating animals causes more harm. To do this would be hypocrisy.
Also, more then rodents are killed and they are not always killed instantly.
If you have a problem with animals dying, this is something you should take into account. If I grow my own food and eat humanely raised and slaughter animals I do less harm.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
Your argument from 2:25 to 3:15 not only represents a misunderstanding of human nature, but it's "all or none" approach is inherently illogical. Of course a being existing has to be selfish, this is an inescapable reality. But what you're saying boils down to "duhhh, if you are going to hurt beings in some indirect way, no matter how small, you may as well go all the way and just torture them!" I like my existence and am aware of the fact that it is selfish, my goal should be to limit it.
LIEPANEW 1 month ago
@LIEPANEW: I address the nirvana fallacy that meat can never be humane (which is true) and also say that you can help animals better by eating humane meat (which is opinion). The part about meat being cheap because less people eat it though doesn't really work as factory farming makes it cheap and S&D doesn't really dictate the prices.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@LiePaNew count: The thing I am talking about is that vegs say you shouldn't eat meat because it will never be perfect. I say that a veg diet is also never going to be perfect. So if the first part is true, than the second part is also true, but neither are.
I think you are talking about improvement. However we can improve, and improve greatly, our treatment of animals. You don't have to stop eating meat, especially you you find nothing wrong with killing and eating animals.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions Can't you take that one step further and eliminate the practice altogether? What's the point of killing other sentient beings if you don't have to?
LIEPANEW 1 month ago
@LIEPANEW: Can't you take that one step further and eliminate the human race altogether? What's the point of causing suffering to other organisms and the planet if you don't have to?
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions Did I not just emphasize the point that beings are inherently selfish, and that I place importance on the existence of human beings? However, being human doesn't give you a free pass to cause suffering since we cause suffering no matter what we do. While existing, we should limit suffering. Stop making erroneous comparisons. If some societies truly need meat to survive, I am not against that.
LIEPANEW 1 month ago
@LIEPANEW: So where do you draw the line and what gives you the right to draw it there? If you really want to reduce suffering, and you can't make that zero "no matter what we do," doesn't it seem logical, according to what you want, to not exist? After all, don't you consider eating meat selfish and thus something we shouldn't do?
We could always just not factory farm and treat animals well.
Having a computer can cause suffering. Should you not have one?
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions You would have to try pretty damn hard to show how having a computer directly causes suffering. Sure it depletes resources... I wouldn't wish for other beings that harm others (carnivorous animals, etc.) not not exist. If you really think that vegans should logically have suicidal tendencies, then you're kidding yourself! Life on earth revolves around selfish ecosystems, which is a plain and simple fact. "Treating animals well" is hard to reinforce, that is wishful thinking.
LIEPANEW 1 month ago
Ha dude quit hatin on us veg's u kno we live longer and have less chance for cancer? Meat also causes impotency and genital shrinking which is big problem for u cuz ur gunna be dicklessXD
crimses 1 month ago
@crimses: Uh, no. I do not have vegs. See, I am attacking mostly attitudes and weak arguments in this video, the the people themselves simply for being vegs.
Once again, you have some misinformation. Vegs don't really live longer, but if they do, it might be 10 years, MIGHT! And a life is not judged with how long it is. Personally it is enjoyment and overall it is what you can accomplish. Wanting to help animals is fine, being a veg doesn't help animals...
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@crimses count. ...because you are not saving any. Yes, if everyone was a veg you would, however that is like saying if everyone didn't murder people there would be no murders so by not murdering people, you save murder victims. Non-action is neutral, not good or bad.
And you get less types of cancer, you actually can get certain types of cancer more often, for instance, colorectal cancer.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@crimses count count: Veg diets have the tendency to make you deficient is some nutrients like Zinc, which can lead to impotency. Meat is high in Zinc and also Iron, which leads to a good sex life.
So let's move on to smaller penises. This is caused by phthalates, which was shown to be in chicken, but are also in plastics, so that water you drink could be in a bottle that causes you to be flaccid.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@crimses final: Oh, and let us not forget that water has the combined artificial estrogen of millions of women on birth control pills, which also causes smaller penises. In fact, sperm counts and penis sizes are down now adays, but it isn't because of meat. I am also not surprised to see that pretty much all of your claims are supported by PETA.
Look at some real facts next time.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions yes being veg helps animals you just dont wanna admit your wrong XD just take the vid down...it offends alotta people even if they don't have tht attitude
crimses 1 month ago
@crimses: Yes, completely ignoring everything I said and not addressing anything really makes be wrong, and in case you didn't get it, that was sarcasm.
As I said, not eating animals and saying you save animals is like saying you help murder victims by not killing people. The animals are going to be killed and you can't say you save lives that don't exist.
What part of this video makes you think I care if people are offended? If they are, it's mostly because I said they were wrong.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
This guy is an ignorant dickwad, his only argument is "Well, you think I'M dumb, well see I can pull random facts out my ass!"
lessbeansplease 1 month ago
@lessbeansplease: So your reasoning as to why I am dumb is to use facts...did you even think that through?
And its less that they disagree with me and more that about 30% of the arguments here are I am fat, thus stupid and ignorant. 60% of the arguments are "meat is immoral."
A personal attack is not a valid argument against someone.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions The facts you are using are incorrect about vegans and vegetarians, not that you are fat, You said that basically that we were dumb because plants take in chemicals like mercury, and SHelly said there are large doeses of mercury in fish, more than in plants. Just because the way we eat isn't perfect does not make it 'moral' to eat things that are just as bad and feel pain just like us.
lessbeansplease 1 month ago
@lessbeansplease: Care to be more specific or are you just going to do a broad "you are wrong" statement?
No, I said that the arguments used were flawed. Fish is bad because of pollution and plants also suck up pollution, so it isn't really a good argument. Besides, you can eat smaller fish if it bothers you.
Just because you find it immoral to eat meat doesn't mean it is immoral. And it's not a reason to eat meat, it's saying the argument is flawed that was used.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
This guy says, "You vegans shouldn't help open-minded people to become vegan. You should waste hours of your time arguing with me." What a dick.
marcluc1988 1 month ago
@marcluc1988: Actually, I never said that. What I said is that people who wanted to be a vegan or vegetarian were already going to become vegan or vegetarian. I went on to say that if you dismiss everyone you will never get anywhere fast. Engagement is what helps, that would be logical engagement, not "you rape and torture animals."
I mean, someone can be open minded while, and pay attention here, DISAGREEING WITH YOU.
BTW, you came back to my video.
What?!?
BLHProductions 1 month ago
FathomlessJoke: Two omnivorous apes who have evolved consciousness and the ability to argue with another ape in and endless debate over whether their consciousness takes away their right to consume the flesh of other animals. Just dawned on me how pointless this has been. It doesn't matter if the human whole world turns vegan or if it continues to eat both meat and plants. Nature won't judge us, only we can judge ourselves. Perhaps you should stop judging me, and I'll stop judging you.
Xiphos0292 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 It does not offend or anger me that you result to hate. It is rather humorous however, since it is no coincidence perhaps that you wrote about primative beings while being so primative yourself. However, I am not sure you should feel very satisfied with such a substandard manner of discourse.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 "Just dawned on me how pointless this has been" While I don't expect one to shed religious beliefs and biases any time soon, I'm not so sure others who see a need for a change won't get something inspirational or informative to trigger a change. So, I am not prepared to say that I personally wasted a second of my time. If, however, you held out a sliver of hope that I'd embrace your lies and rape and torture animals with you and ingest rotting flesh, you wasted your time!
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy How amusing. But I assure you, whether or not you're "not prepared to say that I personally wasted a second of my time," you did.
Xiphos0292 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 When one is busy changing the world, one cannot stop and wonder about another's petty speculations, right?
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy Lol, you go on changing the world then. As long as you die with the perception that you have something to show for it, you'll die happy. But it will be just that - a perception. Still, good luck.
Xiphos0292 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 "you go on changing the world then" I don't have to ask for your permission, but in case that it is blessing thank you! See to not do what is common to men, not follow tradition and cultural condition, to break out of biases and beliefs truly changes the consciouness of all of man, right?
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 "As long as you die with the perception that you have something to show for it, you'll die happy." That is one of the many deep joys of ending ones torture of animals and the ingestation of rot and death: happiness, joy, right now, not tomorrow or when we die. There is a certain calm joy, a deep beauty in ones life when one puts his heart and mind into living rightly, and feeds and clothes himself humanely, decently, with dignity.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Xiphos0292 "But it will be just that - a perception" That seems to be born of beliefs you have. Rather religious of you, if I may say.
Like I said, living rightly has its own reward, in the present, not tomorrow in death, but in living now. The health, the compassion, the appreciation of Earth and all her creatures, it is truly worth it whether anyone else does it or not. Of couse there are hundrends of millions of veg*ns today, and growing all the time.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 "It doesn't matter if the human whole world turns vegan or if it continues to eat both meat and plants" It matters to a lot of folks headed to open heart surgery or an early grave - your chance as a flesh eater to have a premature heart attack or stoke is 1 in 2, that is 50/50, brah.
.
It matters to billions of animals.
.
It matters to the human species, who needs fresh air and water. Right?
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 "Nature won't judge us, only we can judge ourselves" And yet there are consequences to unsound actions in nature, right? They are all around us. If we pollute the soil, it can run off into water, which can harm children who drink it, and cause birth defects for future generations, and fish can be poised, upsetting natural order on Earth...those types of consequences.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Xiphos0292 "Perhaps you should stop judging me, and I'll stop judging you." Are we judging anything? To have sound judgment we must observe. Have we observed anything? I thought we could look at the world anew, as men, and see for ourselves what is right, what is right for our health, our fitness, our planet's resources, for other species, for all the Earth. That is more meaningful than petty judgments.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
Vegans have the right to their lifestyle, but the ones who try and spread their hilarious arguments and convince meat-eaters to "convert" are worthless, deluded fucks. The world will go on eating meat. I will go on eating meat, and I'll enjoy it. I'll go on consuming dairy products, and enjoy that too. I'll do those things, and I'll imagine eating them in front of vegans while laughing hysterically.
Xiphos0292 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292: Some arguments are better than others.
I agree that trying to convert others is wrong, but there is some validity in the health and environmental arguments that many omnivores do not think about. I think most of the problem though comes from talking about morality. If someone thinks it's not immoral to eat meat, no amount of weighted language will change that.
Someone being an ass to someone else won't help things though. Unless attacked, there is nothing to defend.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 It is my lifestyle to stay fit and healthy and not to rape and torture animals nor to eat their diseased rotting flesh. As a result of seeing all the society lies about raping and torturing sentient beings for pleasure, it is part of my lifestyle now to share the truth with others where ever I go, so that they too have a chance to step out of the ignorance, cruelty and sickness. Please respect my lifestyle!
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy I would respect it if you didn't lie and vilify people who don't follow your lifestyle. If you really want to call yourself a vegan, try plowing a field for a day. When you're done, look at all the chopped up animal nests and body parts of mice and lizards, along with countless insects and smaller animals. I've seen it. How cute or human like does something have to be before you attach value to it? Hypocrisy at its finest.
Xiphos0292 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 You are a hater! You are intolerant of other people's lifestyles!! You speciesist!!!!
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy Ah, I see you either didn't read my comment or have retreated to the point of calling names. How sad.
Xiphos0292 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 LOL No, I was giving your silly argument of lifestyle and tolerance right back at you. Tolerate my lifestyle of shouting from the rooftops that it is inhumane to enslave and torture animals for pleasure and unhealthy to ingest their diseased rotting flesh. Tolerate this!
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy I won't tolerate a lifestyle that is hypocritical. But I will tolerate vegans who adhere to their lifestyle, but don't desperately try to convince other people to change for ethical reasons they themselves are not even safe from.
Xiphos0292 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 "I won't tolerate a lifestyle that is hypocritical" Oh, so you get to say then who gets tolerated and who doesn't, whose lifestyle is right and whose isn't, right? Well vegans generally see the death, sickness, and disease of the common way society lives. It is our "lifestyle" to evolve away from that and we generally spend a lot of time educating others as to the harm being done. Again, tolerate this!
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 "But I will tolerate vegans who adhere to their lifestyle" You just claimed that there was no such thing as a vegan. Again, you can't have it all ways.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Xiphos0292 "but don't desperately try to convince other people to change for ethical reasons they themselves are not even safe from." Ethics don't even factor into it. We are talking about facts, not morals or ethics. In fact some of the most moral and ethical peeps in the world are those who are committing all manner of autrocity, including the cruel rape and torture of sentient beings and the spreading of deception that the behavior is acceptable.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: Actually he's right. Animals are killed by the harvesting process. Besides that the vegan products you eat contain animal parts from insects mice.
Speciesist and a very over inflated term to try and apply the same apprehension to eating animals as we have for racists and sexist, but the problem is that woman and men are equal as well as people of the same race. But a cow and a chicken are not equal to each other.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions I explained to him his flaw is character and reasoning quite clearly, thanks.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 "try plowing a field for a day" I grow my own organic gardens and fruit trees, thanks! Two problems with your argument, other than it is generally dull and childish. 1) surely you know the majority of crops are fed to the tens of billions of livestock animals, right? Thus you are the contributer of crop deaths, 2) Incidental harm to animals, which may or may not be true, by no means absolves you of the rape and torture you intentionally inflict every day, right?
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: Two problems with your arguments. 1) Feeding crops to animals is a symptom of greed which goes with our horrible treatment of the animals we eat. We can, however, not feed them crops we can eat and treat them humanely.
2) Intent doesn't matter if your goal is to not kill and/or maim animals. Also, you are the one with the problem with killing animals, I simply don't think we should cruelly raise and kill them.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BLHProductions "We can, however, not feed them crops we can eat and treat them humanely." That's unprecedented. Let's assume for a moment we could find a way to enslave an animal humanely, which is ridiculous on its face, we would still need a way to feed tens of billions of extra mouths. What, destroy more forests? There is no other Amazon rainforest to use. We are doing it the only way we can meet demand for maximize profit. The solution is clear: refuse to participate!
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: Or we could cut down on how much meat we eat and use animals as a way to save up for times when there is a doubt and as a way to turn waste products into food products, and/or hunt.
It's like with cars. We could get rid of them or we could continue to create better quality vehicles that are environmentally friendly.
By the way, think you could refrain for weighted language like slavery? It makes it hard to take you seriously.
People trying to raise food.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions Those are all ways of reform, which is the way of the politician, right? But have you ever tried to talk a rotting flesh eater into cutting down? LOL Clearly you have not. Let me tell ya, John Q Corpsemunch is simply not cutting down but speeding.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: You mean as I have done?
Don't get me wrong, I still do eat meals that are dominated by meat, but I have gone without meat for meals or eaten very little amounts.
Is it not interesting how people seem to not have the power to cut down yet when they quit they say it is an easy thing to do?
Again, I don't eat rotting flesh.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: "Let me tell ya, John Q Corpsemunch is simply not cutting down but speeding."
Which is where eating humane meat by a larger market comes in. If you can charge more for humane meat, less money is lost and more businesses would raise animals better so that they would stay in business. Even more so if humane meat tastes better.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "Which is where eating humane meat by a larger market comes in" We have humane meat already, it is called fruits and vegetables, nuts, seeds, legumes, berries. Mmm. Healthy too. You should try them, for many reasons. Experiement, learn, see what you find out.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@BLHProductions This lazy reasoning is essentially why you want to force me to change my language (rape, torture, enslavement, etc). You know so long as it is seen fundamently for exactly what it is, your silly idea of "humane meat" is exposed for the fraud that it is, right out of the gait.
I don't demand that every cage be comfortable, but rather that every cage be empty.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "Which is where eating humane meat " The first thing that corrupt, cruel oppressors do is change the language, brother. So long as the corrupt man can get the world to describe a lie in favorable terms, he can keep every generation believing it! Unless one refuses to participate. See I would rather die than accept the lies of oppression.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "weighted language like slavery" What are you talking about? Can you see reality? I am a man, I have seen things with my own eyes, not the eyes of the priests, parents, politicians, or profiteers. As such I do not use language that makes you feel good about yourself; I tell it the way it is. Those poor thinking, feeling beings are raped and tortured 24/7 for you to get your Burger King on. That is a fact. The only solution: see reality and refuse to participate.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: Using slavery when taking about raising animals is using language that is emotionally charged.
Do you enjoy sex?
Do you enjoy pushing an oddly shaped organ against another person's oddly shaped organ just so pleasure what runs a risk of getting a disease that might cause your death?
Both of these are asking the same thing, but one is more or less neutral, the other has negative emotion attached to it.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: You can also work with positive.
Would you rather eat only plants or eat tasty humanely raised steak with mouthwatering side dishes?
You don't have to. You can said slaughter, killing, gutting, etc. But when you say enslavement, rape, and torture you use weighted language that I for one, do not respond to. I see what you are doing and I begin to stop taking you seriously because once you try to use emotion, the logic part tends to be over with.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "Using slavery when taking about raising animals is using language that is emotionally charged." You are in denial. You need to watch Earthlings. This is not isolated, it is systemic, and it is real, and it is every day. watch?v=FHA4HNbmDLg
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "Do you enjoy sex?" Neither of us are in denial as to what sex is, right?
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "Both of these are asking the same thing, but one is more or less neutral, the other has negative emotion attached to it." We don't have to invent euphemisms for sex to realize what it is, right? Not there are not lots of names folks call it, but neither of us denies that the very act itself exists and paints up the language so as not to face this fact, right?
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: Seems to be if we cut down on greed we could solve most of the problems.
After all, why would a company listen to someone who has chosen to never again by their products for any reason? If you are a customer shopping somewhere else, you have a louder voice.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "Seems to be if we cut down on greed we could solve most of the problems." Sure, and where do we start? See greed is not some abstract concept out there somewhere, Greed is you and me, it is in the society we construct together, right? So, again, what action can a lowly individual take? Advocate to reform a fundamentally corrupt way of life? Propose modifications? Again, that is silliness for politicians. Refuse to participate and take your life back!
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: Are you really saying that my argument is invalid because it is going to be hard to do?
You can say this is silliness for politicians but you are not going to stop something that is legal or laws that are easier to ignore and pay a small fine than to follow with yelling at people on the internet and calling them a horrible person.
I think I'm don't talking to you now until you get your shit together.
Cheers,
~Remag~
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions I am saying that your argument is invalid foremost because it is an argument. We do not learn to solve anything by argumentation. When the arguments cease, and observation takes place, problems may be solved.
Rationally, however, your argument is invalid because you attempt in vain to reform something that's fundamentally flawed. It is like re-building a house on a cracked foundation, you never end up with a sound structure regardless of your carpentry skills.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "You can say this is silliness for politicians" Is that not what politicians do? They tells us that they will reform education, they will reform healthcare, they will reform welfare, economic policy, foreign policy, etc, etc. Constantly trying to reform that which is fundamentally flawed. And how long have they argued about the best way to reform it? Thousands of years. What has ever happned? A new face on the same problems. Run for office, youll fit right in!!
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "but you are not going to stop something that is legal " Is your claim that what I am saying is false because it is difficult to achieve? LOL
Look, I do stop it everyday. Refusing to participate in it changes all of mankind. All it takes it 1 person to change humanity. Look at Hitler. Say what you want, but brother changed the effing world! Hitler changed the consciousness of mankind. One man! Think of what a handful of healthy, sane, compassionate men could do!
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "I think I'm don't talking to you now until you get your shit together." Hey either you have the rocks to hang or you don't ;)
But, remember, it is very basic to know how to treat others, to refuse to cause suffering to others, to understand what healthy food is, to understand how to look at life as a whole. It is very basic. If we don't have those things, what do we have? Politics? LMAO!
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BLHProductions "After all, why would a company listen to someone who has chosen to never again by their products for any reason?" I am not talking to companies. There is no way I can change them, they are already gone, corrupt, they are making piles of money and don't care what you or I think. I step out of their sickness by refusing to participate. But that is not my primary objective. My intent is to live as healthy as possible, to have a sensitive, healthy mind and body.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "If you are a customer shopping somewhere else, you have a louder voice." But we should not only focus on a couple facets: the greed and cruelty. We have to look at this holistically, from all its angles: health, the environment, humane treatment of others, compassion for others, fitness, ecology, honesty. When we are not tethered to a belief or preference just poking at a few parts of it, but rather we look at this thing as a whole, the answer is crystal clear.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "Intent doesn't matter if your goal is to not kill and/or maim animals" My goal is to do the least harm possible. Raping and torturing animals for petty pleasure, while destroying our water and air and human health is doing the maximum harm. There is a significant difference.
But, closer to the heart of it, why do you offer this argument? Is it not because you do not want to change, that you are afraid to lose your petty pleasures, that you advance such silliness?
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: Ah, in that cause you have one of two options. A) Suicide which will save countless more lives and take one, or B) Choose to not have any offspring, no harm will come to them and they cannot do harm to others. I recommend B, have you looked into the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement?
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: I offer this argument because your goal is not being accomplished by your actions or words. See, your pretty much saying that unnecessary is what I do, not what you do for the sole reason that you do not have a problem with what you do. Any harm you do is necessary harm, no matter how more extravagant it may be.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions Again, I think you are trying to pass cleverness off as truth. It is a cheap knockoff.
I did not say I was perfect, not that I can control other humans, even my offspring. But I can quick calling things in the language of lies, quit belieing like a religious fanatic, quit poisoning my body like an ignorant child and minimize any harm others make have because of my existence. One is a way too minimize, yours is a way to maximize harm.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "A) ... or B) " Actually, have you considered that there is a way to take action in society without participating in it? If you'd stop arguing mindlessly for a single minute you would be able to see that your options are small, those really don't do anything, and you'd perhaps have a chance to consider another way. Sad.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "I simply don't think we should cruelly raise and kill them." Then do something about it! Start by not participating in it. So long as you derive pleasure from something, you are responsible for the consequences. You do not have to participate and all these arguments you proffer are merely distractions to continue in the common, lazy way.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: Not participating will not help the factory farms, but it will will also not help the good farms. I have to problems with the good farms. I think a mixture of buying humanely raise meat and eating meat that was caught and killed by people I know through hunting (I would include fishing, but I don't like the taste of fish) would be a better thing to do, for me at least.
You have a problem with killing animals, so you don't have to eat meat if you don't want to.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: But let's move on to the rest of what you said.
"So long as you derive pleasure from something, you are responsible for the consequences." So that would mean if you obtained pleasure because you were raped, you, the rape victim, are responsible? It would also mean that if no pleasure was obtained from killing a human, the killer would not be responsible.
Please, don't try to feed me your faulty logic.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: Neither do you have to. I participate because I wish to. I will likely never convince you of anything I believe, and that's alright. The act of engaging with you is enough. People who stay among people with the same ideals as themselves, after a while, are doing nothing more than stroking their egos and exchanging stories about the other side using dumb or horrible arguments.
Commonality does not imply wrongness any more than new implies correctness.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 "I've seen it" You have no proof of that, right?
Here is 100% proof of the exploitation, enslavement, rape and torture of innocent animals so that relatively rich, extremely selfish folks can eat bacon cheeseburgers and chicken wings: watch?v=FHA4HNbmDLg
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 "mice and lizards, along with countless insects and smaller animals." I love and respect all of Earth's creatures. Do you? If so, it seems we would stop the systemic rape and torture of innocent sentient beings for petty pleasure of eating their rotting flesh. I am glad you seem to care about animals. Here are things you can do to learn:
watch?v=FHA4HNbmDLg
watch?v=yfsT-qYeqGM
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: I do not eat rotten flesh. In fact, very few people in the world eat rotten flesh of animals. That being said, if done correctly, you can eat rotten flesh or animals, which is usually a fish, because the meat isn't what harms you, it's the bacteria.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy You continue to use the words "rape" and "torture" yet choose to ignore the fact that some farms are working to improve the treatment of livestock animals, and more still DO treat animals with respect and minimize suffering when slaughtering them. I respect Earth's creatures, yes: and I am one of them. I also respect the ecological role of these animals, which they would cease to have if humans simply stopped raising and killing them for food.
Xiphos0292 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 "You continue to use the words "rape" and "torture"" Because that is what takes place, right? Those sentient beings are enslave, raped and torture so that you can eat their rotting parts. If we remove the euphemisms from our language and see things simply, we have a much better shot at seeing reality.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 "choose to ignore the fact that some farms are working to improve the treatment of livestock animals" So they see what we are talking about? Nope! There goal is profit and they think they can dupe you into buying the more expensive product by painting it up prettier than the rest. That is naive.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 "I respect Earth's creatures" Hmmm, except for the billions you rape and torture to eat every year, right?
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 "I respect Earth's creatures, yes: and I am one of them" This is the most important thing you said. Looking past eating animals for a moment, we all share this Earth. We are all on here together, the animals, plants, everyone. We share the same water, air, land, all of us. It is time for man to learn not to destroy the Earth that we all share, and to end the exploitation and enslavement of every species, including his own.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 "which they would cease to have if humans simply stopped raising and killing them for food." Oh so the slave owners are doing the slaves a favor, is that it? That veal calf ripped from its raped mama so that humans can still his food actually owes the few weeks of its tortured life to the man who brutalized it. Is that it? You sure you want to charge up this hill and make that stand?
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@Xiphos0292 "I also respect the ecological role of these animals, which they would cease to have if humans simply stopped raising and killing them for food." Looking past the twisted mind to invent such a rationalization, you will be happy to know that grazing livestock have shown to reverse desertification in certain parts of the famished world. Therefore, with a little hard work, we could quickly transport these animals to happy, productive, FREE lives in this world once again.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
Pollution in the soil is different in that the soil and rain filter and cleanse, therefore the vegatable does not take the toxins, if they are any, directly. With fish, however, polluted water is washed inside and outside of their bodies ever moment of every day. This causes the toxins to reside in their bodies, in the organs, in their muscles, fat. She's not a scientist that proves what she is saying...
Check this out: cbsnews.com/stories/2004/11/22/tech/main657105.shtml
She is the messenger.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: Pollution from humans. Which was my main point. Fish is not as healthy for you as it was because we pollute the planet. That pollution is also from chemical and organic runoff from crops, and of course you have the meat industry and most other industries in one way of another.
If I may, BP.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BLHProductions "Fish is not as healthy for you as it was because we pollute the planet" Yep! So, factor this fact you noted with the facts that fish has LDL cholesterol, saturated fat, single source animal protein that is a toxin to the body, and that when cooked it is carcinogenic...oh, and that it is rotting death, it is a no brainer: consuming fish is sick and unhealthy.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "That pollution is also from chemical and organic runoff from crops" Agreed! Of course you do know where most food crops go? They go to unnaturally and unhealthily fattening livestock for slaughter. This means that to solve the problem of crop pollution our task is infinitely more complex, with tens of billions of extra mouths to feed. So solve the problem it has to be simplified: get rid of the tens of billions of mouths that eat those crops and we have a chance.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "and of course you have the meat industry " Which eats most of the crops, and poisons most of the air. Where do you think 30 billions pig, cow and chicken carcasses go? Think about it; they are burned and dumped into our soil/water. Think about how many peeps are in the world, and realize that the 7 billion people are a fraction of the livestock animals slaughtered every year, which is set to double in 15 years! This makes a tough problem an impossible challenge.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@BLHProductions But hey, maybe you can run for political office one day: those guys LOVE to argue endlessly about the problems and never take action to solve them!
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
I am not sure if you realize how hateful and emotionaly unstable and unintelligent you come off here. It is really quite embarrassing for you. I am sure you are smart and reasonable and good-humored off camera, but on here...not so much!
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: I'm not sure you realize how hypocritical you seem when you say I am hateful but say nothing about "Meat eaters are retarded..." It is really quite embarrassing for you.
I am trying to be entertaining you know. That's why in the comments I am less "in your face" about things.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions ""Meat eaters are retarded..." I was commenting on your vid, not hers. Nice attempt to deflect, which tells me you are at least somewhat aware of what I am saying, but if you cannot withstand public comments on your video content, perhaps you are better off not upping them.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BLHProductions "It is really quite embarrassing for you." And yet I am not here flailing my arms, parading my obesity, while ranting about what I know about bio-chemisty, barely able to put two thoughts together. I think you think your argumentation is far more credible and astute than it actually is.
"I am trying to be entertaining you know" And yet you have no idea the kind of ass you make of yourself. Don't look now, but "that guy" you mock as a clueless idiot, is now you ;P
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
Dr. T. Colin Campbell never claimed that dairy causes cancer. He proved, however, casein makes cancer grow; removing the casein makes it stop. The turmors were already there, dairy products make them grow. watch?v=yfsT-qYeqGM <-- I know the title of this vid is misleading: "Meat and Dairy Cause Cancer'" but that's not what Dr. Campbell claims therein.
.
If you're going to be so smug in your "debunking," you should shed the hysteria and actually examine what you're saying.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: That may be true, however, it only promoted cancer when it was extracted and in a situation where there was a higher amount of aflatoxin than you could consume while eating contaminated food.
When a more real world number was used in a study on monkeys and not mice, the opposite was true, low casein got cancer and high casein were fine. Oh, and the low casein but high aflatoxin mice had a 50% mortality rate where high protein didn't.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "That may be true..." Then perhaps it is time to retract your lies?
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: I didn't lie. I was talking about aflatoxin and casein, which is what the experiment was about. The problem is that lower and more real world aflatoxin levels saw the LOWER casein level animals get cancer where the HIGHER casein level animals did not. Cambell's study say the higher casein animals get cancer, but about half the lower casein level animals diet. 30 animals vs 16, more or less.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
This is the study that Cambell was inspired by: ncbi.nlm.nih. gov/pubmed/4294825
You'll notice that about half the mice for the low protein group died.
This is a newer study using more real world levels of aflatoxin which saw liver damage in the low protein group: informahealthcare. com/doi/abs/10.3109/15569548909059756
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: Actual it was more protein is bad for you, which of course isn't true. In Campbell's study and the Indian study (from India) the low protein mice had a higher mortality rate.
So yes, if I have to choose between a 0 mortality rate and cancer vs a 50% mortality rate, due to the assault of aflatoxin on the liver, but no cancer, I think I'll take the casein. BTW, whey, also in milk, has been shown to be a hinder the growth of cancer.
Tumors caused by high aflatoxin.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions That is a lot of argument you have to go through just to know what to eat. I do not think I was put here to spend my time with that type of complexity to convince myself it is ok to rape and torture innocent, peaceful, sentient beings for petty pleasure. I pick an apple and eat it. No one gets hurt, the ecosystem thrives, and my body is healthy, whole, sane. Simple.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
Do you project your own self loathing on the world? Is that why you are so violently hateful?Guess what, as much contempt you show others, it will not be correct action in your life, it will not get you in shape, it will not cause you to see how to live healthily, it will not purge lies and hate from your twisted mind and heart.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: No. I don't hate the world.
How am I violently hateful? See, you don't seem to grasp that I tend to take on the same tone of the people I am responding to, although it is usually a bit less direct than they are.
So I find it a bit hypocritical that you attack only me and leave the vegs alone. Though, I'm pretty sure I know why. I disagree with what you believe and they don't. Thus they are forgiven and I'm just a fat asshole on the internet.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "How am I violently hateful?" Again, I can only go by how you present yourself in public. You may very well be peaceful, calm, serene, rational in private. But here you wave your arms about and shake your head like a mad man, pacing and mocking and frothing with a bitter, vindictive tone. Maybe you are just a really, really, good actor.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "hypocritical that you attack only me and leave the vegs alone. " I'm not attacking you; I'm trying to save your life, a life that you clearly do not even respect yourself. Now I have no problem letting vegetarians know the evil that goes on to get eggs and dairy on their plates. Nor do I support like a cult worshiper everything every vegan says. I do fundamently share with most vegans (not all!) a care and love of life, health, the planet, and all her creatures.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "See, you don't seem to grasp that I tend to take on the same tone of the people I am responding to" Thereby accomplishing what? Be true to yourself, man! Stop being a puppet or using others as scapegoats or excuses. You are truly the only thing you have in this world, ever. Your mind, body, heart, spirit is the only thing you can ever truly know in your entire life. Respect and love yourself and stop using others as a reason to act in ways you are not proud of.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@BLHProductions "I disagree with what you believe " What that enslavement, rape and torture of sentient beings is cruel and ignorant, unbefitting intelligent humans? That eating diseased rotting animal carcasses is unhealthy and sick? We don't have to believe anything to see the truth of those things, all we have to do is pay attention. See things for ourselves and not just mindless repeat the lies of others. Achtung, baby!
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
If you don't want to present yourself to the public as a fat, arrogant, sexist ass: don't call intelligent grown women, "Sweetie, sweetie, sweetie." Oh...and lose all the excess body fat...and the arrogance!
The good news: your weight and lack of health and hateful attitude and dull mind are the BEST testimony for others NOT eating and living the way you do. So, keep it up! :)
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
@FathomlessJoy: -_-
I'm being condescending to the person who has a condescending voice and is being condescending.
You do realize you are being arrogant yourself right?
And the first woman having to quit being a veg after 20 years due to health reasons is the BEST testimony for others NOT eating and living the way she does. So, if we take all you said, and apply it here, it would mean that no one should be a veg.
Of course your argument is fallacious.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
read the china study,if you want scientific arguments for a vegan nutrition.
Mongodelight 1 month ago
@Mongodelight: The China Study is based on a flawed study. That study was to test the effects of casein of rats. The problem is with the original and Cambell's study is that about half the low protein rats died, so while the high protein rats got cancer, the survival rate was higher for them. The toxin used was also extremely and the high. Tests were done on monkeys with more reasonable toxicity levels and the high protein monkeys were healthy and the low protein had cancer.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@MongoDelight count: This was accounted for because those animals with high casein levels could detoxify the aflatoxin but the detoxified product can promote cancer which casein may act, in a separated form, as a growth promoter for cancer, but the toxin is the root cause still. For low protein but high aflatoxin, the liver cells die too quickly to get cancer, which is why you have a high mortality rate.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@MongoDelight count count: Now when the level is lower at a more natural level, the low protein group cannot detoxify aflatoxin still but the cells don't die as quickly as they are formed, so cancer is the effect of this. With higher casein levels, the aflatoxin is safely detoxified and gotten rid of, which wasn't possible with the super high levels of aflatoxin.
Rats getting cancer with high protein is where you get "protein causes cancer." But it's flawed as I have said.
BLHProductions 1 month ago
@BLHProductions Actually, the purpose of the China Study was to find the cause of cancer.
FathomlessJoy 1 month ago
Ever been to voraciouseats?Great site.Written by vegan, and very humbling to vegans. ot insulting, like I said, site creator is vegan.The writer was a super preachy vegan,but soon got a medical problem that made her need to start eating meat.. Not everyone can be vegan, there is no one size fits all diet. One mans medicine is another mans poison, as they say in some European country.
TapionPinosha 1 month ago