@tikifreakazoid That's not the issue though, the issue is the horrible treatment of the animals while this stuff is done. Slaughter houses are deplorable in the way that they produce the beautiful steaks that are on the family grill every weekend. There are ways to produce meat and eat it without slitting their throat and scalding their feathers off while they're still alive.
@b33p3rz Oh, well that goes without saying. I prefer the old method for cows (Although it does sound gory, it was TONS more merciful than they do it now) where they would let them free-rage and then after a full life had been lived, they used one of those piston-fired machines to end its life quickly and painlessly. This factory bullshit is abominable. And chickens are just given the worst time possible.
@tikifreakazoid I think I heard about that when we were looking over a class at a vocation school I go to now. needless to say I ended up going as a network technician... It is completely sad that a chicken can live a more valuable and fulfilling life in cockfighting, than it can in a life destined for someones plate. Chickens that participate in fighting actually live for about 2 years before their even expected to fight, whereas meal chickens are egg to plate in weeks. I hate stuff like this..
Sigh. Like animals testing is keeping the pharmaceutical companies from curing diseases-that's money, people. Animals feel emotions and pain, you soulless pricks.
I'd be very interested to see a revision of this film that critiqued the animal rights position with a more fair and accurate presentation of that position. I'm not suggesting that satire and caricature should be abandoned, but I'd be more interested to see animal rights advocated mocked for actual shortcomings in their logic rather than for misrepresentations of their position.
When satire is used in this manner, it is not acceptable to simply say "we're just making a joke" -- such a claim is disingenuous. (I'm not suggesting that the makers of this film are making this argument -- but I find that all too often people use "humor" as a cover to advance sloppy and inaccurate arguments and to misrepresent the positions of their opponents -- when in fact the underlying goal is not to generate a laugh but to advance a political agenda.)
response to every argument in the film -- only to the film's method of advancing it's argument. As a person interested in debating the ethics of human use of animals I am interested in well-reasoned arguments both for and against animal rights. Unfortunately, this film fails badly in that regard. Again, claiming that it is satire is not an effective defense of the film's short comings -- it is satire in service to propaganda -- the use of humor to try to make a point and win an argument.
drug, for example, is found to have adverse side effects, it is perfectly reasonable to suggest that use of that drug be discontinued. Similarly, if past scientific research displayed self-awareness in animals, there is no reason to ignore the implications of that research, even if we find the research itself to be objectionable. A more rational response is to consider the data collected and to use that to inform how we conduct future research.
who has argued that reflexive self-awareness provides a sufficient (though not necessarily a necessary condition ) to enfranchise animals with legal rights. Please read Ratting the Cage and Drawing the Line: Science and the Case for Animal Rights by Steven Wise in this regard.
However, even citing date based on morally objectionable research does not weaken the case for animal rights. It is perfectly common to change practices based on the results of scientific research. If an experimental
An example of trying to win an argument by simply not presenting the counterargument an animal advocate might offer is the point about the irony of determining animal self-awareness via animal testing.
An animal advocate would easily respond to this argument by citing the value of non-invasive observational field research like the work of Jane Goodall -- which animal advocates universally support. It's worth looking at the research used as the basis for the argument of the one legal theorist
Another straw man argument is point in the film where the animal advocate argues that animals should have the same rights as humans.
Animal advocates, in almost every presentation of the animal rights position, stress that this is in fact, NOT the argument they are advancing. Rather, they are argue that the rights animals DO have -- which overlap human rights in some areas, but not others -- are of equal importance to human rights.
You can find this position expressed at 5:30 in the
to improve conditions for factory farmed egg laying hens. Compassion Over Killing has also focused on getting companies likeMorningstar Farms, Lightlife Foods, BOCA, and Dunkin Donuts to remove eggs from their products. Groups like United Poultry Concerns and Farm Sanctuary rescue abused hens and distribute books (e.g. Prisoned Chickens, Poisoned Eggs) and films (e.g. Egg-ribusiness) with the the goal of educating consumers on the animal abuse inherent in egg production.
advocate egg consumption. In fact, campaigns against the abuse of egg laying laying hens and advocacy of veganism (a diet free of dairy, meat, and egg products) is very likely the single biggest focus for animal advocates at this time.
Groups like Compassion Over Killing and Mercy for Animals have made undercover investigations into the cruelty of egg farms a major focus, while organizations like Farm Sanctuary and the Humane Society of the United States have focused on state level ballot
of your own position nor have you done anything to discredit the position of your opponent. If anything, you've given GREATER credence to the position you are opposed to by giving the impression that you are incapable of mounting a compelling challenge to your opponent's view. In and of itself this does not prove your opponent's case, but it suggests that:
a) you are a poor debater.
b) your position is indefensible.
or
c) both.
Examples: Straw man - Eggs -- Animal activists do not
whereas this film invents ropes while ignoring lifelines. By inventing ropes I mean attaching to animal activists positions that they don't actually hold as a means to discredit them (the straw man logical fallacy) and by lifelines I mean the arguments that animal activists would actually use to respond to the challenges posed in the film. When you ignore the arguments advocates of a position would use while inventing ones they wouldn't, you've proved nothing in support
debate of one's opponents in their most effective form and then demonstrate why the argument of an opponent, even expressed in its best possible form, doesn't hold up.
Even satire follows certain rules. In satire, one exaggerates a position to express its absurdity. This is different from what t this film does -- distort positions while failing to give animal activists a representation that allows their arguments a fair test. Good satire essentially gives a position the rope to hang itself
Weak and lazy -- like most right wing propaganda. It's easy to win arguments with straw men. It also doesn't prove anything. The makers of this film put no effort into finding out how animal rights activists would actually respond to the arguments posed here. This is not a right or left point -- it's simply the basis of formulating a strong argument as taught to any entry level philosophy student. When one is framing two sides of a debate to prove a point, it is necessary to frame the
@coffinshaker agrees but kll it is not the same as torturing it, and u dont eat animals they have done experiments on! lol
Killing and eating other animals is part of what we are no changing that but, they dont kill them! they keep them alive just to do wierd stuff on them, now we have loads of illegal immigrants and prisoners in the jails to use? why done we :p they only take money to keep alive any way!
Dear Animal Rights Hypocrites, please die a slow and painful death, and may your children die in a car fire cause by a vegan who is dizzy behind the wheel from lack of protein. You are the scum of society comparable to terrorists. You are the people who are slowly ruining the USA. You will never stop the hunt for the forests would be ruined you ignorant cocksuckers. To all the PETA people, George W Bush, Dickhead Cheyney, and Barrack Obamination, may you all rot in hell. God save America.
@jmassey1981 god doesn't exist, idiot. good quality proteins can be found in things other than meat. plus the proteins we get don't come with a side order of heart failure, douchebag. you're a pussy ass bitch
@waqas1887 I weigh 170 actually, and I work out constantly. I don't know how good of a fighter I am, but if you think fighting solves anything you're a moron. Its all about intellect and logic. Which I know I could kick your ass in a debate. A debate doesn't mean throwing insults around either.
The Bible is actually against all meat. In translation, "meat" actually means "nourishment" and "any man who inflicts harm on an animal is as if he does so to another man." This is the dumbest video I've ever seen, though.
It doesn't, actually. We have the digestive systems of herbivores, not carnivores. All animals have canines (you should really do at least 30 seconds of Googling). However, herbivores have dull, short canines. Carnivores and omnivores have long, sharp, curved canines. Human beings have dull, short canines. Carnivores have reduced facial muscles, herbivores have well-developed facial muscles, human beings have well-developed facial muscles. Herbivores have long, complex, often sacculated...
colons. Carnivores and omnivores have short, simple, smooth colons. Human beings have long, sacculated colons. Herbivores have small intestines that are 10 to 12+ times body length, carnivores and omnivores? 3 to 6 times body length. Human beings? 10 to 11 times body length. Herbivores have livers which cannot detoxify vitamin A. Carnivores and omnivores have livers which can detoxify vitamin A. Human beings have livers which cannot detoxify vitamin A. Herbivores have moderately concentrated...
why so serious? these comments got u working huh? bottom line is if we were not supposed to eat meat we wouldn't be able too. u loose no matter how long ur colon is
I'm making myself look like an ass? How? By providing facts and being able to back up the things I say. So what are you making yourself look like by comparing vegetarianism to molestation? Also, I'm a female, so if I am attracted to cocks that would not make me "homo," and if one is homosexual there is nothing wrong with that. Open your eyes, open your mind. Peace be with you. :)
urine. Carnivores and omnivores have extremely concentrated urine. Human beings have moderately concentrated urine. Herbivores jaw motions have no shear, good side-to-side and front-to-back motion. Carnivores and omnivores jaw motions are shearing, with minimal side-to-side motions. Human beings?No shearing, good side-to-side and front-to-back. Herbivores have a small mouth opening vs. head size, carnivores and omnivores have a large mouth opening vs. head size. Human beings?Small vs. head size.
i cant wait to see how much more time u spend making yourself look like an ass. Whats next? u gonna try and justify touching little boys the bible rocks................cocks fucking homo get a life
One last thing: I'm glad you were able to prove your claim. Oh. Wait. You weren't. That's probably because your claims goes against basic fact. Oops. Sorry. By the way, a cow could eat meat, and in factory farms, they are often fed meat. Same with chickens, pigs, and any other herbivores. You have this thing inside your head called a brain, perhaps it's time to start using it. I'm done, though. Bye, dear!! <3
another thing the Eucharist supposedly eating the body of christ and drinking his blood hmmmmmm sounds vegetarian to me ......o yea and copy pasting shit from different websites doesnt make them true all that info and you have not proven your point colon sizes and the bible would not hold up in a debate just think about it im fucking with you and you still cant make a solid argument one more thing wat claim was i making i was responding to your comment
"And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat." -----Genesis 1:29. "But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat."--Genesis 9:4.
"Ye shall eat no manner of blood, whether it be of fowl or of beast, in any of your dwellings. Whatsoever soul it be that eateth any manner of blood, even that soul shall be cut off from his people."--Leviticus 7:26 -27.
i win i win i win i win i win i win i win you lose you lose you lose hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha so loser how does it feel to suck at life hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
i thought you were better than that o well so can you scientifically prove that humans are herbivores? no you cant. therefore you lose. i win i don't think anything else needs to be said, another lame response like the last one will just make you look weaker so just quit while you're ahead keep your head up and i hope you do better next time, good luck
zing got these bitches running wild ha ha sorry i thought u were a faggot but you are a girl which makes more sense why u get so worked up, exciting i like this, now lets get smart, technically your facts are theories so your not that smart second you are basing your eating habits on the most controversial book in the world still felling smart, and third if being homo is ok how come they cant get married in a church your holiness
I didn't realize I was worked up. Weird. If you're going to say we should get smart, here's some pointers: learn how to spell 3-letter words; learn how to use punctuation; learn what capital letters are and what they mean; know anything about... well, anything. Also, The Bible is full of contradictions. Hence God saying killing any innocent living creature is wrong and then saying killing innocent living creatures is okay. Constant contradictions. Also, I don't even believe in The Bible, so what
gives you the idea that I base anything around something I don't believe in? I mentioned The Bible in response to you, every time I mentioned it. So, sorry, again, you fail. Since you can't even handle a simple dietary disagreement, it's even more pointless to attempt to discuss homosexuality and gay rights with you. By the way, what solid argument have I not made? The one where I didn't explain to you the differences between carnivores, omnivores, and herbivores and where our species compares?
Oh. Wait. Oops. I did make that argument. I proved to you that your whim of a right-wing media induced claim was false, and you proceeded to call me a child molesting gay male. And yes, facts about the digestive system of carnivores, omnivores, and herbivores compared and contrasted to human beings would be the only real part of a debate in whether or not human beings are meant to eat meat. Anyway, as entertaining as your childish attempts at sounding hardcore and smart have been, it's just
boring now. I would like to thank you for several things, though. Thank you for providing an endless amount of laughter. It will forever be a grand inside joke that vegetarianism=homosexual child molestation. Thank you for reminding me just how brainless some people can be. And lastly, thank you for making me feel 1000000000000000000000000000000000x better about myself. Love you forever. Peace out. <3
Desperate huh? thats alot of zeros for no commas smart ass if this was a essay or some sort of official document then yea punctuation and grammar all day but since im just making you feel better i dont think its that important. now u lost the bible part, now the rest it is not a scientific fact that we are herbivores therefore i win plain and simple. and the little math equation u brought up makes no sense if ur so smart then u would know how to read so re read then re comment love ya bunches
What math equation did I bring up? If you "win," how come I'm the only one who provided any evidence? Wow. Why am I even responding? You have zero brain cells, it's really quite pointless. Buh bye, friend. I hope someday you can understand what words mean.
i got some evidence a fucking medical encyclopedia read one and another thing if the human body was not meant to eat meat then how come vegetarians need to take extra supplements to replace the protein you get from meat. you done yet? sorry about the equation thing it was a joke you didnt get it, i understand and the evidence you brought up does not prove anything about why humans are not supposed to eat meat o yea "you have zero brain cells" "i hope someday you can understand what words mean"
@paz42889 we don't have to take extra supplements. only the retarded ones who can't afford a proper vegan diet have to. -_- you're living of of right wing myths
@paz42889 we don't have to take extra supplements. only the retarded ones who can't afford a proper vegan diet have to. -_- you're living of of right wing myths
way to imply that poor people are retarded. thanks a lot.
If you actually read the Bible (yes, thats with a capital B) you would realize that in the New Testament, God declares ALL animals to be "clean." Acts 10:14
I simply care more about humans than I do animals. Unless a species is going into extinction, it can be used (sparingly) to further human life.
tikifreakazoid 5 months ago
@tikifreakazoid That's not the issue though, the issue is the horrible treatment of the animals while this stuff is done. Slaughter houses are deplorable in the way that they produce the beautiful steaks that are on the family grill every weekend. There are ways to produce meat and eat it without slitting their throat and scalding their feathers off while they're still alive.
b33p3rz 5 months ago
@b33p3rz Oh, well that goes without saying. I prefer the old method for cows (Although it does sound gory, it was TONS more merciful than they do it now) where they would let them free-rage and then after a full life had been lived, they used one of those piston-fired machines to end its life quickly and painlessly. This factory bullshit is abominable. And chickens are just given the worst time possible.
tikifreakazoid 5 months ago
@tikifreakazoid I think I heard about that when we were looking over a class at a vocation school I go to now. needless to say I ended up going as a network technician... It is completely sad that a chicken can live a more valuable and fulfilling life in cockfighting, than it can in a life destined for someones plate. Chickens that participate in fighting actually live for about 2 years before their even expected to fight, whereas meal chickens are egg to plate in weeks. I hate stuff like this..
b33p3rz 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
mmmmm...sweet cancer killing jooces
axsys212 7 months ago
How did that little kid get AIDS?!
Moshikashitenai 8 months ago
@Moshikashitenai Either 1 of his parents were a carrier of AIDS or he was raped...Those are my guesses.=:S
gordogreat74 5 months ago
@Moshikashitenai Blood transfusion :(
b33p3rz 5 months ago
Sigh. Like animals testing is keeping the pharmaceutical companies from curing diseases-that's money, people. Animals feel emotions and pain, you soulless pricks.
OhMistahJay 11 months ago
Comment removed
OhMistahJay 11 months ago
funny!!!!! GOOD WORK lOOOOOVE IT XD
LoveTheVoiceWithin 11 months ago
hHAAHAHA wow rofl XD
LoveTheVoiceWithin 11 months ago
A lot of animals that are being tested are rats and flies. Is that immoral?
1234yersiman 11 months ago
its sooooooooooooooo cute!!
AllyTV1 1 year ago
I'm a teacher and I was looking for ways to help students when i stumbled across these vids. They are HILARIOUS!!!
deathb4dishonor599 1 year ago
which side is this video for??
itchynights 1 year ago
LOL at all the PETA members comments below...
pythor2 1 year ago
what the fuck? Equal rights? is this satire... it doesn't really feel like it, it sounds like a retards morality.
animals suffer, animals are living beings so they deserve some rights..
GravDiga 1 year ago
I love animals, they taste like pain. :)
l337pwnage 1 year ago
I won't cure AIDs ever again!
anvita99 1 year ago 2
"i think you have morel schizophrenia" XD
JuliusVonPringleton 1 year ago
Jeeze... captain buzz kill down here :P
l
l
v
thegrova 1 year ago 2
I'd be very interested to see a revision of this film that critiqued the animal rights position with a more fair and accurate presentation of that position. I'm not suggesting that satire and caricature should be abandoned, but I'd be more interested to see animal rights advocated mocked for actual shortcomings in their logic rather than for misrepresentations of their position.
AdamWeissman 1 year ago
When satire is used in this manner, it is not acceptable to simply say "we're just making a joke" -- such a claim is disingenuous. (I'm not suggesting that the makers of this film are making this argument -- but I find that all too often people use "humor" as a cover to advance sloppy and inaccurate arguments and to misrepresent the positions of their opponents -- when in fact the underlying goal is not to generate a laugh but to advance a political agenda.)
AdamWeissman 1 year ago
response to every argument in the film -- only to the film's method of advancing it's argument. As a person interested in debating the ethics of human use of animals I am interested in well-reasoned arguments both for and against animal rights. Unfortunately, this film fails badly in that regard. Again, claiming that it is satire is not an effective defense of the film's short comings -- it is satire in service to propaganda -- the use of humor to try to make a point and win an argument.
AdamWeissman 1 year ago
drug, for example, is found to have adverse side effects, it is perfectly reasonable to suggest that use of that drug be discontinued. Similarly, if past scientific research displayed self-awareness in animals, there is no reason to ignore the implications of that research, even if we find the research itself to be objectionable. A more rational response is to consider the data collected and to use that to inform how we conduct future research.
This is not intended as a point-by -point
AdamWeissman 1 year ago
who has argued that reflexive self-awareness provides a sufficient (though not necessarily a necessary condition ) to enfranchise animals with legal rights. Please read Ratting the Cage and Drawing the Line: Science and the Case for Animal Rights by Steven Wise in this regard.
However, even citing date based on morally objectionable research does not weaken the case for animal rights. It is perfectly common to change practices based on the results of scientific research. If an experimental
AdamWeissman 1 year ago
An example of trying to win an argument by simply not presenting the counterargument an animal advocate might offer is the point about the irony of determining animal self-awareness via animal testing.
An animal advocate would easily respond to this argument by citing the value of non-invasive observational field research like the work of Jane Goodall -- which animal advocates universally support. It's worth looking at the research used as the basis for the argument of the one legal theorist
AdamWeissman 1 year ago
Late Late Show interview with animal rights philosopher Tom Regan, for example.
Look up "Animal rights philosopher Tom Regan on the Late Late show Part 1 of 4. " on YouTube.
AdamWeissman 1 year ago
Another straw man argument is point in the film where the animal advocate argues that animals should have the same rights as humans.
Animal advocates, in almost every presentation of the animal rights position, stress that this is in fact, NOT the argument they are advancing. Rather, they are argue that the rights animals DO have -- which overlap human rights in some areas, but not others -- are of equal importance to human rights.
You can find this position expressed at 5:30 in the
AdamWeissman 1 year ago
to improve conditions for factory farmed egg laying hens. Compassion Over Killing has also focused on getting companies likeMorningstar Farms, Lightlife Foods, BOCA, and Dunkin Donuts to remove eggs from their products. Groups like United Poultry Concerns and Farm Sanctuary rescue abused hens and distribute books (e.g. Prisoned Chickens, Poisoned Eggs) and films (e.g. Egg-ribusiness) with the the goal of educating consumers on the animal abuse inherent in egg production.
AdamWeissman 1 year ago
advocate egg consumption. In fact, campaigns against the abuse of egg laying laying hens and advocacy of veganism (a diet free of dairy, meat, and egg products) is very likely the single biggest focus for animal advocates at this time.
Groups like Compassion Over Killing and Mercy for Animals have made undercover investigations into the cruelty of egg farms a major focus, while organizations like Farm Sanctuary and the Humane Society of the United States have focused on state level ballot
AdamWeissman 1 year ago
of your own position nor have you done anything to discredit the position of your opponent. If anything, you've given GREATER credence to the position you are opposed to by giving the impression that you are incapable of mounting a compelling challenge to your opponent's view. In and of itself this does not prove your opponent's case, but it suggests that:
a) you are a poor debater.
b) your position is indefensible.
or
c) both.
Examples: Straw man - Eggs -- Animal activists do not
AdamWeissman 1 year ago
whereas this film invents ropes while ignoring lifelines. By inventing ropes I mean attaching to animal activists positions that they don't actually hold as a means to discredit them (the straw man logical fallacy) and by lifelines I mean the arguments that animal activists would actually use to respond to the challenges posed in the film. When you ignore the arguments advocates of a position would use while inventing ones they wouldn't, you've proved nothing in support
Two examples:
AdamWeissman 1 year ago
debate of one's opponents in their most effective form and then demonstrate why the argument of an opponent, even expressed in its best possible form, doesn't hold up.
Even satire follows certain rules. In satire, one exaggerates a position to express its absurdity. This is different from what t this film does -- distort positions while failing to give animal activists a representation that allows their arguments a fair test. Good satire essentially gives a position the rope to hang itself
AdamWeissman 1 year ago
Weak and lazy -- like most right wing propaganda. It's easy to win arguments with straw men. It also doesn't prove anything. The makers of this film put no effort into finding out how animal rights activists would actually respond to the arguments posed here. This is not a right or left point -- it's simply the basis of formulating a strong argument as taught to any entry level philosophy student. When one is framing two sides of a debate to prove a point, it is necessary to frame the
AdamWeissman 1 year ago
this is so disturbing.......
itom5000 1 year ago
Kill it and eat it, kill it and eat it, kill it and eat it, kill it and eat it, kill it and eat it, kill it and eat it....
coffinshaker 2 years ago
@coffinshaker agrees but kll it is not the same as torturing it, and u dont eat animals they have done experiments on! lol
Killing and eating other animals is part of what we are no changing that but, they dont kill them! they keep them alive just to do wierd stuff on them, now we have loads of illegal immigrants and prisoners in the jails to use? why done we :p they only take money to keep alive any way!
MasterOfFlash92 1 year ago
Animal testing for things like a cure for cancer is different
but killing something that can feel pain for nothing more than consumption and pleasure isn't moral.....in my opinion
mfjeff 2 years ago
Dear Animal Rights Hypocrites, please die a slow and painful death, and may your children die in a car fire cause by a vegan who is dizzy behind the wheel from lack of protein. You are the scum of society comparable to terrorists. You are the people who are slowly ruining the USA. You will never stop the hunt for the forests would be ruined you ignorant cocksuckers. To all the PETA people, George W Bush, Dickhead Cheyney, and Barrack Obamination, may you all rot in hell. God save America.
jmassey1981 2 years ago
@jmassey1981 god doesn't exist, idiot. good quality proteins can be found in things other than meat. plus the proteins we get don't come with a side order of heart failure, douchebag. you're a pussy ass bitch
IAmTheCthulhu 1 year ago
@IAmTheCthulhu
look who's calling some one a pussy ass bitch hahah.what do vegan guys weigh 120 pounds hahahahahh.......................
waqas1887 1 year ago
@waqas1887 I weigh 170 actually, and I work out constantly. I don't know how good of a fighter I am, but if you think fighting solves anything you're a moron. Its all about intellect and logic. Which I know I could kick your ass in a debate. A debate doesn't mean throwing insults around either.
IAmTheCthulhu 1 year ago
@IAmTheCthulhu
1:defending ur self & loved ones (not crying home to mommy) requires physical and mental strength both(not sayin that u have either)
2:health:if ur weak and have low stamina that is only bad.Ask ur girlfriend (if u got one).
My point is it's fuckin stupid & the only reason i insulted u is bcoz u said 2 someone "you're a pussy ass bitch " ?????????
Not the words i'd use if was 170(assuming u r even that).lol
waqas1887 1 year ago
@waqas1887 go beat off to rush limbaugh you right winged nut and leave me alone
IAmTheCthulhu 1 year ago
@IAmTheCthulhu
alright ur pissed.Mission accomplished.My work here is done:)
BTW most liberals eat meat too,it's not a left or right thing................
waqas1887 1 year ago
@jmassey1981
so true .hahah.
waqas1887 1 year ago
The Bible is actually against all meat. In translation, "meat" actually means "nourishment" and "any man who inflicts harm on an animal is as if he does so to another man." This is the dumbest video I've ever seen, though.
Jexpel 2 years ago
if we weren't supposed to eat meat then why does our digestive system specialize in digesting meat and why do we have canine teeth?
PoysonLove 2 years ago
It doesn't, actually. We have the digestive systems of herbivores, not carnivores. All animals have canines (you should really do at least 30 seconds of Googling). However, herbivores have dull, short canines. Carnivores and omnivores have long, sharp, curved canines. Human beings have dull, short canines. Carnivores have reduced facial muscles, herbivores have well-developed facial muscles, human beings have well-developed facial muscles. Herbivores have long, complex, often sacculated...
Jexpel 2 years ago
colons. Carnivores and omnivores have short, simple, smooth colons. Human beings have long, sacculated colons. Herbivores have small intestines that are 10 to 12+ times body length, carnivores and omnivores? 3 to 6 times body length. Human beings? 10 to 11 times body length. Herbivores have livers which cannot detoxify vitamin A. Carnivores and omnivores have livers which can detoxify vitamin A. Human beings have livers which cannot detoxify vitamin A. Herbivores have moderately concentrated...
Jexpel 2 years ago
why so serious? these comments got u working huh? bottom line is if we were not supposed to eat meat we wouldn't be able too. u loose no matter how long ur colon is
PoysonLove 2 years ago
I'm making myself look like an ass? How? By providing facts and being able to back up the things I say. So what are you making yourself look like by comparing vegetarianism to molestation? Also, I'm a female, so if I am attracted to cocks that would not make me "homo," and if one is homosexual there is nothing wrong with that. Open your eyes, open your mind. Peace be with you. :)
Jexpel 2 years ago
urine. Carnivores and omnivores have extremely concentrated urine. Human beings have moderately concentrated urine. Herbivores jaw motions have no shear, good side-to-side and front-to-back motion. Carnivores and omnivores jaw motions are shearing, with minimal side-to-side motions. Human beings?No shearing, good side-to-side and front-to-back. Herbivores have a small mouth opening vs. head size, carnivores and omnivores have a large mouth opening vs. head size. Human beings?Small vs. head size.
Jexpel 2 years ago
Should I continue or would you like to try to claim that a proven herbivorous digestive system specializes in digesting meat?
Jexpel 2 years ago
i cant wait to see how much more time u spend making yourself look like an ass. Whats next? u gonna try and justify touching little boys the bible rocks................cocks fucking homo get a life
PoysonLove 2 years ago
One last thing: I'm glad you were able to prove your claim. Oh. Wait. You weren't. That's probably because your claims goes against basic fact. Oops. Sorry. By the way, a cow could eat meat, and in factory farms, they are often fed meat. Same with chickens, pigs, and any other herbivores. You have this thing inside your head called a brain, perhaps it's time to start using it. I'm done, though. Bye, dear!! <3
Jexpel 2 years ago
another thing the Eucharist supposedly eating the body of christ and drinking his blood hmmmmmm sounds vegetarian to me ......o yea and copy pasting shit from different websites doesnt make them true all that info and you have not proven your point colon sizes and the bible would not hold up in a debate just think about it im fucking with you and you still cant make a solid argument one more thing wat claim was i making i was responding to your comment
PoysonLove 2 years ago
acts 10:13 "and a voice came to him, "Rise, Peter; kill and eat."" this is in the bible god is telling peter to kill and eat google that
PoysonLove 2 years ago
"And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat." -----Genesis 1:29. "But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat."--Genesis 9:4.
Jexpel 2 years ago
o yea read the passover story exodus that will prove you wrong too a sacrificial lamb for dinner not too vegetarian huh
PoysonLove 2 years ago
"Ye shall eat no manner of blood, whether it be of fowl or of beast, in any of your dwellings. Whatsoever soul it be that eateth any manner of blood, even that soul shall be cut off from his people."--Leviticus 7:26 -27.
Jexpel 2 years ago
i win i win i win i win i win i win i win you lose you lose you lose hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha so loser how does it feel to suck at life hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
PoysonLove 2 years ago
i thought you were better than that o well so can you scientifically prove that humans are herbivores? no you cant. therefore you lose. i win i don't think anything else needs to be said, another lame response like the last one will just make you look weaker so just quit while you're ahead keep your head up and i hope you do better next time, good luck
paz42889 2 years ago
i am a proud meat eater....
whoareyapauldunn 2 years ago
me too no homo
PoysonLove 2 years ago
But I mean really, how are you going to compare vegetarianism to child molestation?
Jexpel 2 years ago
zing got these bitches running wild ha ha sorry i thought u were a faggot but you are a girl which makes more sense why u get so worked up, exciting i like this, now lets get smart, technically your facts are theories so your not that smart second you are basing your eating habits on the most controversial book in the world still felling smart, and third if being homo is ok how come they cant get married in a church your holiness
PoysonLove 2 years ago
I didn't realize I was worked up. Weird. If you're going to say we should get smart, here's some pointers: learn how to spell 3-letter words; learn how to use punctuation; learn what capital letters are and what they mean; know anything about... well, anything. Also, The Bible is full of contradictions. Hence God saying killing any innocent living creature is wrong and then saying killing innocent living creatures is okay. Constant contradictions. Also, I don't even believe in The Bible, so what
Jexpel 2 years ago
gives you the idea that I base anything around something I don't believe in? I mentioned The Bible in response to you, every time I mentioned it. So, sorry, again, you fail. Since you can't even handle a simple dietary disagreement, it's even more pointless to attempt to discuss homosexuality and gay rights with you. By the way, what solid argument have I not made? The one where I didn't explain to you the differences between carnivores, omnivores, and herbivores and where our species compares?
Jexpel 2 years ago
Oh. Wait. Oops. I did make that argument. I proved to you that your whim of a right-wing media induced claim was false, and you proceeded to call me a child molesting gay male. And yes, facts about the digestive system of carnivores, omnivores, and herbivores compared and contrasted to human beings would be the only real part of a debate in whether or not human beings are meant to eat meat. Anyway, as entertaining as your childish attempts at sounding hardcore and smart have been, it's just
Jexpel 2 years ago
heres another equation for u
paz42889=poysonLove
paz42889 2 years ago
boring now. I would like to thank you for several things, though. Thank you for providing an endless amount of laughter. It will forever be a grand inside joke that vegetarianism=homosexual child molestation. Thank you for reminding me just how brainless some people can be. And lastly, thank you for making me feel 1000000000000000000000000000000000x better about myself. Love you forever. Peace out. <3
Jexpel 2 years ago
Desperate huh? thats alot of zeros for no commas smart ass if this was a essay or some sort of official document then yea punctuation and grammar all day but since im just making you feel better i dont think its that important. now u lost the bible part, now the rest it is not a scientific fact that we are herbivores therefore i win plain and simple. and the little math equation u brought up makes no sense if ur so smart then u would know how to read so re read then re comment love ya bunches
paz42889 2 years ago
What math equation did I bring up? If you "win," how come I'm the only one who provided any evidence? Wow. Why am I even responding? You have zero brain cells, it's really quite pointless. Buh bye, friend. I hope someday you can understand what words mean.
Jexpel 2 years ago
i got some evidence a fucking medical encyclopedia read one and another thing if the human body was not meant to eat meat then how come vegetarians need to take extra supplements to replace the protein you get from meat. you done yet? sorry about the equation thing it was a joke you didnt get it, i understand and the evidence you brought up does not prove anything about why humans are not supposed to eat meat o yea "you have zero brain cells" "i hope someday you can understand what words mean"
paz42889 2 years ago
@paz42889 we don't have to take extra supplements. only the retarded ones who can't afford a proper vegan diet have to. -_- you're living of of right wing myths
IAmTheCthulhu 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@IAmTheCthulhu
@paz42889 we don't have to take extra supplements. only the retarded ones who can't afford a proper vegan diet have to. -_- you're living of of right wing myths
way to imply that poor people are retarded. thanks a lot.
doonuter 1 year ago
Raises questions but does nothing to answer them. Useless!!!
vaatc 3 years ago
I think that was the point.
WindChildsWorld 2 years ago
If you go by the bible, then you should only eat what the bible lists.
However tons of animals are eaten that tech. shoulden't be.
Again if you go by the bible.
Anyway, awsome shit!
Silvers24 3 years ago
If you actually read the Bible (yes, thats with a capital B) you would realize that in the New Testament, God declares ALL animals to be "clean." Acts 10:14
elitemarksman89 3 years ago
good shit elitemarkman89 treated his ass i would have never cared enough to know that but im proud of u good work
PoysonLove 2 years ago