Philosophical Vegan Forum

Oh, this shit.

A few days ago I was listening to CBC radio (part of probably the largest news organization in Canada, which is funded by the government technically, but has a goal to keep things impartial,) and they had a French chef come on to speak on why he thinks it's so great that Foie Gras didn't come under restrictions or get banned in the US state of California.

I can't remember what he said well enough to repeat it verbatim, but I think I should be able to paraphrase what he said without skewing or strawmanning his position. I'll look to see if the conversation is available online, so that people here can actually hear it, and see I'm not actually skewing what he said.


Some of the main points he said were; "this is great, because it upholds the liberties our countries were founded on," and "you shouldn't restrict us from making the food we want, because it inhibits our creativity. If a particular chef doesn't like it, they don't have to do it, but you can't tell the other chefs on what to do."

He also said "the ducks don't find it nearly as stressful as some people think, for example [we have got scientists to perform this test on the ducks to check for stress markers that I will hardly go into any detail on, or even state these scientists actual credentials] and the ducks clearly showed to have more stress when someone tried to pick them up, rather than when [having the metal rod down their throat force feeding them] so [that must mean the stress they feel when being force fed isn't much at all because it's supposedly less than when someone tries to pick them up.]"

It would've been much better, (at least for his argument,) though extremely improbable if he could've actually said and proven the ducks don't feel any stress at all while being force fed, but he seemed to think by his "scientific study" showing them less stressed in that situation than when someone tries to pick them up, makes it somehow not stressful for them.

Also, note the part in brackets like this "[ ]" are parts where I've elaborated on what he said to make it clearer in what he was actually saying without the spin he put on it. Those parts I possibly could've strawmanned him with, so I'll be trying to find the actual conversation to post here, so that people here can read/hear both and make their own judgement on if I was presenting what he said properly.

This reply is to brimstoneSalad,

It's a shame that we continuously talk past each other, could have been a more reasonable conversation.
Taking into consideration your latest answer I presume that you hold a conceited opinion about your expertise in the subject and feel the urge to resort to personal insults in order to convey the message.

Therefore this will be my last post!

If you notice in my previous answer I jokingly compared your dietary choice to a religion by stressing the apparent absurdity with parentheses, how surprised was I when in the second half of your post, you proceeded to argue with the same vigour and poor choice of supposed metaphors, only characteristic of religious zealots. Irony abounds!

So good luck to you in your life avoiding avocados until further notice, just in case!

phileas007 wrote:This reply is to brimstoneSalad,

It's a shame that we continuously talk past each other, could have been a more reasonable conversation.
Taking into consideration your latest answer I presume that you hold a conceited opinion about your expertise in the subject and feel the urge to resort to personal insults in order to convey the message.

Therefore this will be my last post!

If you notice in my previous answer I jokingly compared your dietary choice to a religion by stressing the apparent absurdity with parentheses, how surprised was I when in the second half of your post, you proceeded to argue with the same vigour and poor choice of supposed metaphors, only characteristic of religious zealots. Irony abounds!

So good luck to you in your life avoiding avocados until further notice, just in case!

Before you go, can you watch the Earthlings documentary online? It's on YouTube for free.

EquALLity wrote:]
Before you go, can you watch the Earthlings documentary online? It's on YouTube for free.

I mean, it's in your signature for fucks sakes.

phileas007 wrote: It's a shame that we continuously talk past each other, could have been a more reasonable conversation.

It's up to you, if you want to clarify your position or not.

phileas007 wrote: If you notice in my previous answer I jokingly compared your dietary choice to a religion by stressing the apparent absurdity with parentheses,

When you mock and insult people like that, don't be surprised if they take you for an asshole. You want a reasonable discussion? Then state your views clearly and logically, and you may get the kind of reply you want. Don't try to be a clown.

phileas007 wrote: Therefore this will be my last post!

If you're too sensitive to have a heated discussion, then don't start shit with people. Maybe avoid the internet entirely if you're such a delicate little flower.
If you can't or won't defend your views in a logical way, that's up to you. Clearly you have no rational retort, so you're just pretending to be offended and leaving in a huff.
Next time, if you honestly want to have a conversation with somebody, try to carry yourself more rationally and attempt to avoid any bad humor, at least until you establish a rapport. Maybe you won't come off as such an asshole. That is if you honestly want to engage in a real conversation, and not just spout anti-scientific nonsense and not be criticized for it -- that's not an option.

Are you an asshole in "real life"? I don't know. But you have been here. You're welcome to stay, but don't expect to be treated with respect if you can't be respectful yourself.

I mean, it's in your signature for fucks sakes.

ROFL! Yep!

*flips table*

It's Ken Ham, seriously, what do you expect!?

RedAppleGP wrote:It's Ken Ham, seriously, what do you expect!?

Well, he believes all the animals were vegetarians before Adam and Eve sinned.

Presumably he thinks it's then more moral to treat animals kindly, right?
Or at least, to abstain from torturing them.