Why not? You have been here long enough to have read all the main arguments. What's keeping you from taking that step?
Sorry for going off topic, but I am curious.
Why not? You have been here long enough to have read all the main arguments. What's keeping you from taking that step?
I'd be willing to discuss it. We could start a new thread, or you could PM me.
What do you think about the problem of overfishing and the environmental effects of such?
PsYcHo wrote: ↑Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:10 amThe other reason is I have a partner who puts up with me and my eccentricities. They have made it clear that they have no intention to go Vegan (although they love the sly Vegan meals I sneak into our diet... ) and I value their happiness (and my own) more than I value being more moral than most.
PsYcHo wrote: ↑Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:10 amI have read the arguments for going Vegan, and I agree. (mostly...I'd probably still eat fish/shrimp/oysters/most seafood) If my partner were to decide they wanted to give Veganism a chance, I'd gladly switch. I have tried to suggest it, but it's not going to happen. (13 years together, I know what battles I can win)
I encourage people to step outside of their comfort zone as the comfort zone is often a very harmful place (both to themselves and to others).
This is perhaps consistent with your views on humans who do bad things (torturing a murderer or pedophile being OK), but where's the line?
I think Jebus is right that the environmental arguments against fishing (not against rope grown oysters, but against fish) are quite strong.
To back this up:
Overfishing is getting to be beyond problematic. I find farmed fish to be just as good (taste wise) as "wild caught".
We do occasionally make our own meals, but we tend to eat together at least once daily (supper) and we often entertain guests as well. (This is a new development, seeing as how we've just changed careers.)Jebus wrote: ↑Wed Nov 29, 2017 8:59 am I don't understand the argument that the diet of one's partner is relevant. I have lived with the same person almost ten years and although she has made great dietary improvements she is not vegan. I cook my food and she cooks hers. It's no different from when I used to live alone.
I agree, but there is a reason it's called a comfort zone. And oftentimes, if you push someone too hard, they will retreat even more forcefully to their comfort zone, and be less willing to entertain the notion of ever leaving it again.
That was a large part, and I do eat more ethically when I prepare my own food. But I also cook for both of us, and guests, so I try to accommodate everyone.brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:52 pm I thought a big part of your reason was your job, which had you always on the move?
The line is blurred, much as if you mix black and white. I try to find a suitable shade of grey; perhaps not always the best path.brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:52 pmThis is perhaps consistent with your views on humans who do bad things (torturing a murderer or pedophile being OK), but where's the line?
If you do something bad to a bad person, do you become a bad person, and is it then OK to do something bad to you?
But to torture someone to save lives is also unethical; the old "Does the end justify the means?" debate.brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:52 pm I would say it is right to kill murderers to keep them from killing others if that must be done, but it's still wrong to cause them unnecessary pain; we should not torture people unless it's saving lives.
That's actually an excellent idea. I've been thinking about the best way of disposing myself but perhaps that's a topic for another thread.
Not so, due to bioaccumulation and biomagnification.
Well, hunters typically kill them before that happens. You would likely see a lot more without hunters.
Well, nature shows aren't the reality of the environments we're talking about; large predators are pretty much extinct; there are only a few bears and cougars. Thus adults are basically like elephants; immune to predation (except for humans) and just food for scavengers when they die.
The torturing is wrong, but the saving of lives is right. It's a question of which weighs more heavily.
Well, as long as we can agree it's technically wrong to harm fish even if they're baby eating monsters.
https://greenburialcouncil.org/home/what-is-green-burial/ That would make an interesting topic.