Working with meat.

[PsYcHo]

actually never. That has always been my position. I don't understand "animal love" arguements for veganism when the fact is that usually children fear animals from the very beginning, and animal love is something that happens only in very controlled environments and that have to be taught. It is ok for children to fear a dog, or a cat, it is a natural instinct that most people keep to adulthood. So ethical veganism arguments are not very sound to reality

Umm, check you-tube for dog or cat meets baby, then say again how children fear animals. They are taught to fear animals, often for good reasons.

Ethical reasons are considered by some to be the least effective argument, but by that logic, we should let children that are born with birth defects die. Eugenics.

[brimstoneSalad]

If you're killing crows that are eating crops that might feed your family, then so be it.

This would be a case of it not being possible or practicable to avoid harming animals. It's still wrong to kill them, but your own needs to survive override that. You should try to find other methods to keep the crows away, though.

Sometimes we have to do wrong to survive, but it's not a choice. Today we have a choice to not harm animals as much, which is where veganism comes in.

What is cruel in relation of the animal-human relationship is not the killing part, is perhaps all they go through their whole lives.

Nonsense. Yes, animals suffer horribly on factory farms, but there are some farms in which animal suffering during their lives is limited, and the animals are killed quickly (at around two years old, as children). Would you be OK with eating that meat, since according to you animals don't care about living? Why or why not?
Do you support "happy meat"? Your reasoning seems to.
Would you eat meat from a human farm, where children are raised and play with toys until they are ten years old, and then stunned and bled out painlessly?

If you don't care about life, why do you care about veganism?
Purely selfish reasons, for your own health? Environmental reasons, to stop global warming and help humans only?

[brimstoneSalad]

I don't understand "animal love" arguements for veganism

It's not animal love, it's morality. You don't have to love somebody -- you can even hate somebody -- to recognize intellectually that harming that person is morally wrong.

So ethical veganism arguments are not very sound to reality

Ethical veganism is the ONLY real argument for veganism.
Wearing a fur coat harms your health not at all. Torturing small animals for fun doesn't harm the environment.

You can make other arguments (aside from ethical) for vegetarianism.
A person who agrees with a health argument may not eat meat, but wear a fur coat. A person who agrees with the environmental argument may stop eating meat, but still delight in capturing and torturing neighborhood cats to death. Neither are vegan, but they're both vegetarians since all vegetarianism means is abstaining from meat (with or without ethical reasons).

You just completely misunderstand the argument, and present a straw man instead. You equate ethical veganism with emotional appeal, but it couldn't be further from it.

[vegan81vzla]

You might as well be a solipsist if you ignore the overwhelming evidence of animal intelligence and behavior.
The only thing animals DON'T care about are things like ownership, because they don't even know they are owned. As long as you are not harming them (a symbiosis like having a pet, and not like farming), then there's nothing non-vegan about it.

I never said animals weren't intelligent, nor that they didn't feel. I say that, animals will never put human needs over their own, so why sould we?

A domesticated animal can understand basic empathy and reciprocity in relationships. A domesticated dog or cat will not kill you without a second thought.

a "domesticated" animals very well might kill or attack another human, adult or child, even without them being a real threat, and even when the animal is regarded by the owner as very well "domesticated"

Neither would a member of some uncivilized tribe from the ancient past -- European, Asian, African; ancient civilizations were brutal and without empathy for outsiders.

quite irrelevant, we are in the present, not in the past. Besides, that's the whole point. Humans, we might have a chance in a vegan and more just world, to fix our problems without violence. Animals, no matter how domesticated, will always go back to it. Even sex is violent for them. That's why we are different

You have not shown how that is. You laugh at them because you don't understand them.

they are laughable because no one else hear them, not me. I am already vegan, so who cares what I think. Everyone else (other carnists) care less about animal sentience

You aren't vegan, not by the definition.
And you ARE telling others they aren't vegan when you say people who own cats aren't vegan, or that the vegan definition means X (whatever you've imposed upon it, in your twisted definition) and that those who don't fit it aren't vegan.

let me get this straight, someone posts asking for answers on a topic, and the only answer that is allowed is a reassuring one? you do realize that to the question "is owning cats vegan?" allows only for a yes/no answer. And both are just opinions. Mine, and I stand by it, will always be NO.

You're just wrong, possibly because your mind has been twisted by the pseudo-philosophy of Ayn Rand and others. Like with a theist, you're sticking to your dogma, and all you use to support it are bald assertions.

It is the current vegan propaganda that is very dogmatic and that rejects all forms of arguements. Just because it comes from the current vegan approved dogma, does not mean it is correct.

[vegan81vzla]

Ethical reasons are considered by some to be the least effective argument, but by that logic, we should let children that are born with birth defects die. Eugenics.

no. because ethics only works for human-human relations. Humans either understand or can be taught basic ethics, we recognize among ourselves. animals do not. There is no ethic discussion among human-animal relationships.

[vegan81vzla]

Nonsense. Yes, animals suffer horribly on factory farms, but there are some farms in which animal suffering during their lives is limited, and the animals are killed quickly (at around two years old, as children). Would you be OK with eating that meat, since according to you animals don't care about living? Why or why not?
Do you support "happy meat"? Your reasoning seems to.
Would you eat meat from a human farm, where children are raised and play with toys until they are ten years old, and then stunned and bled out painlessly?

If you don't care about life, why do you care about veganism?
Purely selfish reasons, for your own health? Environmental reasons, to stop global warming and help humans only?

Actually, "happy meat", "grass fed meat" "human farms" are a consequence to vegans asking for "animal rights" or better treatment for animals from humans. The message is wrong if vegans keep asking for humans to treat animals better. All they should be asking for is to stop consuming. Yo do realize that the number of farm animals is like 10 times more the number of humans, right? and in a utopian vegan world, we would just either have to let those animals die, or just kill them ourselves, right?

[PsYcHo]

I never said animals weren't intelligent, nor that they didn't feel. I say that, animals will never put human needs over their own, so why sould we?

Excuse my ignorance as a meat-eater, but animals live by instinct. A hungry dog will eat meat or bread. He has no choice. Dog - "I'm hungry, oooh, a piece of meat on the ground! Yummy! /" oooh, a piece of bread on the gound, Yummy!"

The difference, I am a human. Meat is tasty. However, I don't rely on what other people give me, or I find on the ground. I can choose to eat meat or not. A dog cannot go to the nearest store and request the vegan special.

If you think a dog will not put human needs over their own, starve a dog for a week, (since you do not seem to to think that animal "feelings" matter) Then, place a raw steak between you and the dog, (preferably a pit bull or a German Shepard. ) Go for the steak.

[vegan81vzla]

Excuse my ignorance as a meat-eater,

I think that I have never implied that diet makes you dumb or smart.

I don't get the point of your example. Most likely, a "domesticated" dog will know a steak, and if starving, will eat the steak instead of attacking the human, as he might also know or fear the human. If the example was with a wolf though, well... I hope I am wise enough not to get in the way of a starving wolf

[PsYcHo]

Like I said, I wouldn't eat it. I am just a vegan that does not have animal sentience as a list of priority for being vegan, nor regard animal live as sacred as if killing one is a punishable sin... I don't eat nor regard animals as valuable for us humans, but that is as far as I will go, I ain't vegan for them.

I must ask a simple question. Perhaps I have misjudged you. If animal sentience isn't a priority, and you have no qualms about killing animals, how would you define your particular brand of Veganism?

[vegan81vzla]

I must ask a simple question. Perhaps I have misjudged you. If animal sentience isn't a priority, and you have no qualms about killing animals, how would you define your particular brand of Veganism?

you should read my comments on the vegan definition and my take on what veganism is here

https://theveganatheist.com/forum/viewt ... 677#p10677

It is stated in the definition that we promote animal-free productos FOR the benefit of humans, animals and the environment. I am a vegan for humans. A socialist/humanist vegan if you please, that regards that, as for the animals sake, as long as we are all vegans, and we stay away from them, they will be just fine, they do not need us, we do not need them.