What's your opinion of militant vegans?

[KaiserElectric]

So we should exploit all the forest and cows to create the Art! And destroy everything for the sake of it if needed, because art requires sacrifice!

Seriously, intelligent means also that you can control your destructive, exploitative and aggressive nature and protect the world around when you see its weak spots (such as less intelligent species or advanced organisms) at least from yourself.

So you expect all humans to be perfect creatures of nature in perfect harmony with the Earth around us? Isn't imperfection what makes us human?

And why must humans be at their core "destructive, exploitative, and aggressive"? Plenty of intelligent people have done destructive things, and plenty of not so intelligent people have done great things, haven't they?

 

[Miles Teg]

Just curious, are these militant vegans arming themselves? Joining militias? Committing acts of terrorism? If not, they aren't really militant.

I'm not normally a stickler for precise definitions but I think that the conflation between peacefully expressing an idea in a mean/shocking/hateful way and actually taking up arms is a bad thing.

For the record, I'm a meat eater who finds moralizing veggie lovers to be annoying. I'm not inclined to hassle veggie lovers however, since that would be just as annoying for them.

 

[KaiserElectric]

I believe militant is just a term for aggressive. Tomato, tomahtoh, if you ask me.

 

[Miles Teg]

Probably. But I suppose that everyone has to find somewhere to make their stand as a grammar nazi, and this is where I make mine.

 

[KaiserElectric]

I usually reserve my grammar nazism to actual grammar.

 

[MantaRevan]

I believe militant is just a term for aggressive. Tomato, tomahtoh, if you ask me.

Yes. Generally adamant in nature.

 

[Miles Teg]

I usually reserve my grammar nazism to actual grammar.

I see you've found the place to make your stand.

 

[Aleksey_aka_al]

Isn't imperfection what makes us human?

No way. Desire of perfection what is.

I am not sure animals have that, at least those except most intelligent.

And why must humans be at their core "destructive, exploitative, and aggressive"?

Dunno. But they are. And very persistent in these things currently.

 

[de Maistre]

Show me one cow or pig that has ruined his planet.

O'Leary's cow?

I dislike dogmatism of any sort. I am sympathetic to veganism and vegetarianism however, and I believe that any being capable of physical or emotional pain should be spared from maltreatment, whether they can count to ten or not. That's not to say that I believe the meat industry should be banned, but I do think it should be held to some level of decorum.

 

[Traitorfish]

I've honestly never met one. All the vegans I know are, at most, a bit peevish.

 

[Crezth]

Being a normal vegetarian myself, I don't like militant vegetarians and vegans.

On the other hand, I also hate normal people who try to "convert" me away from vegetarian. At this point, because it's happened so much, my general reaction to people who say things like "eating vegetarian isn't' healthy" or "eating plants is cruel, you're mean! trolololol" and so forth is generally something like this:

This seems consistent with my experience regarding vegetarians. Those I know get harassed endlessly by people who know that they're vegetarians who aren't. It's really quite uncomfortable.

Yes, okay, the "for every cow you don't eat I'll eat two" joke was a little funny at first, but now you're just being annoying.

The awful thing is those people are then under the impression that they're the ones being oppressed. That is, they harp on about how vegetarians are trying to steal their rights, or are trying to tell them how to live, or whatever. For some reason, these people never get upset by Jehova's Witnesses, or the morality lobby in politics. Oh, and they always find a way to fit "Hitler was a vegetarian" into conversations.

So, yeah. Never met a militant vegetarian. Met plenty of self-righteous omnivores, however.

 

[cybrxkhan]

This seems consistent with my experience regarding vegetarians. Those I know get harassed endlessly by people who know that they're vegetarians who aren't. It's really quite uncomfortable.

Yes, okay, the "for every cow you don't eat I'll eat two" joke was a little funny at first, but now you're just being annoying.

The awful thing is those people are then under the impression that they're the ones being oppressed. That is, they harp on about how vegetarians are trying to steal their rights, or are trying to tell them how to live, or whatever. For some reason, these people never get upset by Jehova's Witnesses, or the morality lobby in politics. Oh, and they always find a way to fit "Hitler was a vegetarian" into conversations.

So, yeah. Never met a militant vegetarian. Met plenty of self-righteous omnivores, however.

Exactly.

The people who bother me and other vegetarians about it, from my experience, seem to expect us to be some kind of drugged-out ultra-idealistic hippies or something who don't know what we're doing. Even if we do do vegetarianism for ethical reasons (as in my case, for the most part), I mean most of us do acknowledge we have better things to do than trying to convert everyone to vegetarianism.

It's really annoying when they ask things like "Are you healthy?" or "Are you sure this is the best thing for your health?" or "How can you even get enough nutrients?"

And I'm thinking something like "Do I look unhealthy to you?"

Sure, I'm skinny, but that's actually because of an unrelated medical problem of mine (not anorexia, in case you're wondering; it's Crohn's) - otherwise I look just as healthy or unhealthy as everyone else. Or, heck, just look at my family's, who's also vegetarian - Do they look normal to you? Of course they do! Vegetarians are normal people too. We aren't your let's-all-love-each-other hippies.

 

[Disgustipated]

Show me one cow or pig that has ruined his planet.

But on another note, I'm glad I became a vegetarian, but vegans still seem a bit radical to me.

I don't see a problem with using animals for things if they don't get hurt by it.

cows and pigs contribute to global warming. They crap everywhere without regards to the environment.

 

[RobAnybody]

Some people are making the same mistake that C. Thomas Howell made in Soul Man. Militant <> military.

Yes, okay, the "for every cow you don't eat I'll eat two" joke was a little funny at first, but now you're just being annoying.

I disagree. This never stops being funny. As long as you only use it on new vegetarians/vegans you meet, of course. Or, well, at least the ones who get preachy about it first. If you bring up the Unoffical Cow War pre-emptively, just 'cause you find out someone's a vegan/vegetarian, then, yeah, that's obnoxious. Anyway, I don't have a cow scoreboard or anything, but I think I'm winning.

The awful thing is those people are then under the impression that they're the ones being oppressed. That is, they harp on about how vegetarians are trying to steal their rights, or are trying to tell them how to live, or whatever. For some reason, these people never get upset by Jehova's Witnesses, or the morality lobby in politics. Oh, and they always find a way to fit "Hitler was a vegetarian" into conversations.

I've never seen this happen, though. I'd make fun of anyone who did that just as much as I'd make fun of "militant vegans/vegetarians". That sounds like a Militant Carnivore, & neither side should be miltant about it. People should eat what they like, & keep it to themselves, for the most part. Most militants should be mocked, though, IMO, regardless of what they're being militant about.

 

[Quackers]

I really hate "militant" anybody. Violence is bad mm'kay.

I hate fanatics and think they should all be blown up.

You dare say that on civFANATICS?

i'm sorry amadeus but you got pwnt here ;p

 

[Traitorfish]

I really hate "militant" anybody. Violence is bad mm'kay.

Wait, "violence"? I thought we were just talking about over-aggressive preachiness, not full on ALFism.

 

[Quackers]

I thought Militant meant being a bit violent?

 

[Traitorfish]

Literally, I suppose, but it's usually used in contexts like this to mean "belligerent" or "aggressive". I guess the OP didn't really specify.

Although, come to think of it, most militant-but-not-violent vegans tend to sympathise with the militant-and-violent vegans, so there's not necessarily an ideological chasm there.

 

[classical_hero]

It is arbitrary, and it is not at all about the right of the stronger. For example, implicit in that axiom is that a weaker human is considered more "valuable" than a strong animal.

You have to take an arbitrary position to start with. There are only three possibilities:
1) humans are more important than any other animals
2) humans are as important as some animals
3) humans are just as important as any other animal

Take your pick and explain why the first is less moral. I think you are confusing morals with a (misguided) attempt at coherence ("respect every living creature" hippie stuff). Personally I could make up "moral" arguments against any of those.

But I must point out that the third is also suicidal if one were to interpret it as "we must respect all other animals" as, inevitably, we're going to kill more than a few over the course of out natural lives. And the only other possible interpretation for 3) would be "we should use and kill other humans just as we use and kill animals".

I may as well go into detail and explain (again) why I disapprove of 2). And I have two reasons to disapprove. One is logic: because the choice of those some animals to protect will be made by humans, which will have to assume the role of judges - thus the very act of proclaiming some animals "equal to humans" affirms the superiority of the humans doing it... logical contradiction! And the other is moral: people are bound to disagree on which animals to protect, setting humans against humans allegedly for the sake of protecting animals, in reality for the sake of enforcing some human's preferences over those of others. Hardly a paragon of morality, to oppress fellow humans for the sake of some baby seals on the Arctic or "sea kittens" or whatever.


Really, there is no moral high ground on this, actually, it's a matter of preferences. And that's what irks me the most whenever those animal rights activists try to force laws to impose their worldview, and do it with all smug with presumed moral superiority.

1. Because the Bible says that we are made in the image of God. No other creature is made in the image of God, thus that is why we are worth more than animals.

Now I will say that we breed some animals for slaughter we should be making their lives as comfortable as possible since we want them to be relaxed as they live out their lives. A relaxed animal taste better and plus even though I want to eat them, I do want to cause animals to suffer because of that desire. That is why i like what we do here in Australia for the most part in our treatment of animals. They are generally allowed to roam areas and eat well and are stunned before they get killed. Some farming techniques are just awful for the animals and they should be banned.

If someone decides to be a vegetarian I have no problems with that, as long as they don't try and force it on me and i won't do the same to them.

 

[Traitorfish]

If someone decides to be a vegetarian I have no problems with that, as long as they don't try and force it on me and i won't do the same to them.

Stay out of my (hypothetical) uterus, I'll say out of your kitchen, how about that?