The human race as a whole doesn't treat animals very well, not just eating them, poaching endangered species such as gorilla and rhino for 'medicinal perposes', intelligent creatures such as dolphins kept in swimming pools and made to perform tricks for food, animals in slaughter houses mistreated and just treated as produce before they're killed, I seen footage of pigs being cruelly treated and battered by workers before they're slaughtered, makes me ashamed of my species sometimes
Very true, we could be kinder and more humane.
But, to indulge the Mozza rant, as mammals we are also designed by evolution to eat the proteins/amino acids that an animal diet provides. And since most of the world doesn't have access to luxury products like soya and tofu alternatives what choice do people have but to hunt and fish?
The other issue is ... do people really really think that if we all go vegetarian entire breeds of cattle, sheep, birds, etc, won't be wiped out/go extinct because there would be no reason for breeding and who is going to look after them all? Is Mozza going to become a "pet owner" to a herd of cattle from a superfarm? Are you? Am I? What happens to the ginormous backlog of animals no longer needed? Are we expected to keep a cow apiece as well as a windturbine in our back gardens (most of us can't even afford that) and many people can't afford to care for their domestic dogs and cats.
All issues that get totally glossed over by the anti-meat eaters. Just what exactly are the plans for these enormous backlog of unwanted animals?
Mostly slaughter or neglect would beckon.
Vegetarians need to think carefully about their utopia because in this vegetarian utopia animals suffer too, most notably the complete destruction of ancient breeds and species that could be never seen again as they have no primary purpose.
The human race as a whole doesn't treat animals very well, not just eating them, poaching endangered species such as gorilla and rhino for 'medicinal perposes', intelligent creatures such as dolphins kept in swimming pools and made to perform tricks for food, animals in slaughter houses mistreated and just treated as produce before they're killed, I seen footage of pigs being cruelly treated and battered by workers before they're slaughtered, makes me ashamed of my species sometimes
I agree with you on some points but cavemen and women ate meat, so we have ate meat for centuries and centuries etc. I personally don't think there's anything wrong with eating meat. I wish the animals bred for slaughter could be better treat worldwide though. I know people are either for, or against eating meat, but I don't think there's anything wrong eating animal flesh. After all, if some animals do it, why shouldn't we? We're animals as well.
The double standards in this thread are outstanding. People say extreme things about vegans and vegetarians regularly, but nobody starts threads about it. It's just an excuse to be outraged and sententious.
It's called "free speech". Nobody forces you to listen or read it.
You don't call it "preaching" when people say you should eat meat - as happens all day, every day, on TV adverts, in the media, from the authorities etc. That is truly forcing an opinion on the population. You won't cry when a celebrity says you should eat meat or starts spewing ignorance against veganism, which happens far more frequently.
Neighing about perceived "preaching" is not equal to the £40,000,000,000 EU subsidies to animal farmers, which ensures that animal produce is artificially cheap while plant produce - which uses 8-60 times less land to farm than animal products - is artificially expensive. That is real-life controlling what people eat, always in meat-eaters favour.
Likening meat eaters to paedophiles is pathetic and idiotic. If he can say what he wants then people are free to say what they want about him. It works both ways
The double standards in this thread are outstanding. People say extreme things about vegans and vegetarians regularly, but nobody starts threads about it. It's just an excuse to be outraged and sententious.
It's called "free speech". Nobody forces you to listen or read it.
You don't call it "preaching" when people say you should eat meat - as happens all day, every day, on TV adverts, in the media, from the authorities etc. That is truly forcing an opinion on the population. You won't cry when a celebrity says you should eat meat or starts spewing ignorance against veganism, which happens far more frequently.
Neighing about perceived "preaching" is not equal to the £40,000,000,000 EU subsidies to animal farmers, which ensures that animal produce is artificially cheap while plant produce - which uses 8-60 times less land to farm than animal products - is artificially expensive. That is real-life controlling what people eat, always in meat-eaters favour.
So it's okay to say that someone who eats meat is the same as a paedophile then? It was an incredibly idiotic and stupid thing to say.
Likening meat eaters to paedophiles is pathetic and idiotic. If he can say what he wants then people are free to say what they want about him. It works both ways
Precisely. Free speech for him, and free speech for us.
The human race as a whole doesn't treat animals very well, not just eating them, poaching endangered species such as gorilla and rhino for 'medicinal perposes', intelligent creatures such as dolphins kept in swimming pools and made to perform tricks for food, animals in slaughter houses mistreated and just treated as produce before they're killed, I seen footage of pigs being cruelly treated and battered by workers before they're slaughtered, makes me ashamed of my species sometimes
I'm ashamed of them all the time, but I don't try to change people nowadays. When I was younger I got involved in heated debates but I don't anymore as I know so few people share my views on things, so I'm ashamed of that too- it's a vicious circle.
He says if he is introduced to meat eaters, he walks away. This is useful info; if I am ever unfortunate enough to meet him, I will inform him right away that I love a bacon sandwich.
Seriously, he is a complete knob, with a severely over-inflated sense of his own importance. Trying too hard to still be relevant - pathetic really.
That's why Robert Smith from the Cure eats meat: to p*ss
his old enemy Moz off.
Morrissey is to veggies what Pat Robertson is to Christians;
someone who makes the sensible majority of them groan every
time he opens his mouth.
Er, who is "outraged"? Who has a problem with veggies and vegans? None of those apply to me. Dunno about anyone else here.
Exactly I have no problem with veggies or vegans, just pricks like Morrissey making offensive comments who don't engage their brain before opening their mouth. So anyone who enjoys a bacon sandwich is like Ian Watkins? Really? :o What an appalling comment.
How does he think the victims' families will react to that?
..I love him, he is the left-wing's Katie Hopkins.
Are you calling him "left wing" purely because of his vegetarianism? And is vegetarianism itself inherently "left wing" anyway, or just something that certain people feel free to lump together as "politically correct[ness gone mad]" and smear the "loony" left with?
At any rate, Morrissey has been repeatedly attacked for making comments some people perceive as racist, which would generally be considered "right wing" behaviour... Interestingly, Brigitte Bardot, in recent years a strident animal rights activist, has also attacked Muslim culture and been fined for making supposedly racist comments. So go figure if you consider these people left or right wing.
Just another lead singer of an 80s boy band who is confused about his identity.
Er, seriously?! Like them or not, I don't think you could reasonably claim they were ever a "boy band"- not in their origins, their image, nor even the audience they attracted. I'm sure they had a few female (and male) fans that were fancied Morrissey- or possibly the others- but overrated or not... "boy band"? Nope.
Do people really really think that if we all go vegetarian entire breeds of cattle, sheep, birds, etc, won't be wiped out/go extinct because there would be no reason for breeding and who is going to look after them all? Is Mozza going to become a "pet owner" to a herd of cattle from a superfarm? Are you? Am I? What happens to the ginormous backlog of animals no longer needed? Are we expected to keep a cow apiece as well as a windturbine in our back gardens (most of us can't even afford that) and many people can't afford to care for their domestic dogs and cats.
All issues that get totally glossed over by the anti-meat eaters. Just what exactly are the plans for these enormous backlog of unwanted animals?
Mostly slaughter or neglect would beckon.
Vegetarians need to think carefully about their utopia because in this vegetarian utopia animals suffer too, most notably the complete destruction of ancient breeds and species that could be never seen again as they have no primary purpose.
This is the argument that (e.g.) people who support horse racing or fox hunting use, "All those dogs/horses would have to be killed". In a sense, it's a sort of moral blackmail, even if it wasn't planned that way.
As for breeds being lost, bear in mind that a "breed" is a human concept, and I doubt of concern to the animals themselves. Most breeds are still the same *species*, i.e. should be able to produce viable offspring if they mated, the main concern for an animal!
Of course, breeds are an issue for animals in as far as domesticated breeds might have characteristics that make it harder for them to survive in the wild. (Which assumes that most of them would have the chance to try, which wouldn't be practical anyway).
Bear in mind that wild animals don't have a "purpose" either, or rather, they don't have a human-defined "purpose". But, of course, that isn't their concern any more than a human defines her "purpose" and value in terms of what (e.g.) a wild boar thinks(!)
Back to the question... The logical answer in *this* case would be... well, yes, most of the animals will have to die, but they'd have been killed eventually anyway. Whether it would then be morally acceptable to eat the meat of these animals is a different question.
Not saying that this is my position (as I said, I'm not even vegetarian), just that it's a reasonable response to the point you made.
The double standards in this thread are outstanding. People say extreme things about vegans and vegetarians regularly, but nobody starts threads about it. It's just an excuse to be outraged and sententious.
It's called "free speech". Nobody forces you to listen or read it.
You don't call it "preaching" when people say you should eat meat - as happens all day, every day, on TV adverts, in the media, from the authorities etc. That is truly forcing an opinion on the population. You won't cry when a celebrity says you should eat meat or starts spewing ignorance against veganism, which happens far more frequently.
Neighing about perceived "preaching" is not equal to the £40,000,000,000 EU subsidies to animal farmers, which ensures that animal produce is artificially cheap while plant produce - which uses 8-60 times less land to farm than animal products - is artificially expensive. That is real-life controlling what people eat, always in meat-eaters favour.
I don't recall any media telling us we should eat meat, any more than a Quorn advert is telling us we should eat pretend-meat.
Also, I don't recall meat eaters accusing vegetarians/vegans of being the equivalent of paedophiles or Nazis. When that happens, I fully expect there to be a thread about it!
Just another lead singer of an 80s boy band who is confused about his identity.
You owe me a keyboard, Super_Steve, this one is full of tea! Should I ever meet Morrissey (let's hope not) I shall discuss your theory with him, before taking a big munch of my sarnie which may or may not contain meat.
Human teeth are designed the way they are so you can tear meat with the front teeth and chew with the back ones. I have no problem with vegetarians, and accept it is a healthier diet in many ways but humans as a species are omnivores (ie we eat meat and plants). Cavemen ate meat too.
The double standards in this thread are outstanding. People say extreme things about vegans and vegetarians regularly, but nobody starts threads about it. It's just an excuse to be outraged and sententious.
It's called "free speech". Nobody forces you to listen or read it.
free speech cuts both ways.
morrisey can say what he like. and i can call him a **** for it. for saying i am as bad as a paedophile.
i'm sure you can find examples where people have said on here that you are as bad as a paedophile. and you will doubtless provide examples. or withdraw your statement.
Back to the question... The logical answer in *this* case would be... well, yes, most of the animals will have to die, but they'd have been killed eventually anyway. Whether it would then be morally acceptable to eat the meat of these animals is a different question.
Not saying that this is my position (as I said, I'm not even vegetarian), just that it's a reasonable response to the point you made.
I can't see why it would be immoral to eat an animal's flesh. Wild animals eat the flesh of other animals so why shouldn't we? We're animals as well.
Moz is nothing but a tree hugging vegetable molesting tool. People like him and Macca really boil my pi$$, preaching their unwanted opinions to others. People should be able to eat what they want without being preached upon.
Paul McCartney's attitude is completely, utterly different. Much more 'try a meat free day once a week'. He certainly doesn't go around saying he would walk away from meat eaters!! He has principles and beliefs and cares passionately about animals but he's not a 'tool' with it.
It makes me laugh how people take what Morrissey says as real. Do you not know that he's the biggest joker going?
Yes, agreed! Hilarious how many people get offended by his blatant trolling. You can't take anything he says remotely seriously, for example he mentions in that interview that he walks away from ANYBODY who eats meat. This is blatantly untrue. He has a massive family with about 5 or 6 sisters and countless nieces and nephews, you're telling me not one of these would be a meat eater? Guy's a wind up merchant, particularly with the press, and the great unwashed just keep swimming around those barrels waiting to be shot.
Human teeth are designed the way they are so you can tear meat with the front teeth and chew with the back ones. I have no problem with vegetarians, and accept it is a healthier diet in many ways but humans as a species are omnivores (ie we eat meat and plants). Cavemen ate meat too.
But humans are no longer cavemen. We have luxuries like Supermarkets which give us more choice in our diet.
Comments
Very true, we could be kinder and more humane.
But, to indulge the Mozza rant, as mammals we are also designed by evolution to eat the proteins/amino acids that an animal diet provides. And since most of the world doesn't have access to luxury products like soya and tofu alternatives what choice do people have but to hunt and fish?
The other issue is ... do people really really think that if we all go vegetarian entire breeds of cattle, sheep, birds, etc, won't be wiped out/go extinct because there would be no reason for breeding and who is going to look after them all? Is Mozza going to become a "pet owner" to a herd of cattle from a superfarm? Are you? Am I? What happens to the ginormous backlog of animals no longer needed? Are we expected to keep a cow apiece as well as a windturbine in our back gardens (most of us can't even afford that) and many people can't afford to care for their domestic dogs and cats.
All issues that get totally glossed over by the anti-meat eaters. Just what exactly are the plans for these enormous backlog of unwanted animals?
Mostly slaughter or neglect would beckon.
Vegetarians need to think carefully about their utopia because in this vegetarian utopia animals suffer too, most notably the complete destruction of ancient breeds and species that could be never seen again as they have no primary purpose.
I agree with you on some points but cavemen and women ate meat, so we have ate meat for centuries and centuries etc. I personally don't think there's anything wrong with eating meat. I wish the animals bred for slaughter could be better treat worldwide though. I know people are either for, or against eating meat, but I don't think there's anything wrong eating animal flesh. After all, if some animals do it, why shouldn't we? We're animals as well.
Likening meat eaters to paedophiles is pathetic and idiotic. If he can say what he wants then people are free to say what they want about him. It works both ways
So it's okay to say that someone who eats meat is the same as a paedophile then? It was an incredibly idiotic and stupid thing to say.
Precisely. Free speech for him, and free speech for us.
Christmas hand yourselves into the police now!
I'm ashamed of them all the time, but I don't try to change people nowadays. When I was younger I got involved in heated debates but I don't anymore as I know so few people share my views on things, so I'm ashamed of that too- it's a vicious circle.
That's why Robert Smith from the Cure eats meat: to p*ss
his old enemy Moz off.
Morrissey is to veggies what Pat Robertson is to Christians;
someone who makes the sensible majority of them groan every
time he opens his mouth.
Exactly I have no problem with veggies or vegans, just pricks like Morrissey making offensive comments who don't engage their brain before opening their mouth. So anyone who enjoys a bacon sandwich is like Ian Watkins? Really?
How does he think the victims' families will react to that?
Are you calling him "left wing" purely because of his vegetarianism? And is vegetarianism itself inherently "left wing" anyway, or just something that certain people feel free to lump together as "politically correct[ness gone mad]" and smear the "loony" left with?
At any rate, Morrissey has been repeatedly attacked for making comments some people perceive as racist, which would generally be considered "right wing" behaviour... Interestingly, Brigitte Bardot, in recent years a strident animal rights activist, has also attacked Muslim culture and been fined for making supposedly racist comments. So go figure if you consider these people left or right wing.
Er, seriously?! Like them or not, I don't think you could reasonably claim they were ever a "boy band"- not in their origins, their image, nor even the audience they attracted. I'm sure they had a few female (and male) fans that were fancied Morrissey- or possibly the others- but overrated or not... "boy band"? Nope.
This is the argument that (e.g.) people who support horse racing or fox hunting use, "All those dogs/horses would have to be killed". In a sense, it's a sort of moral blackmail, even if it wasn't planned that way.
As for breeds being lost, bear in mind that a "breed" is a human concept, and I doubt of concern to the animals themselves. Most breeds are still the same *species*, i.e. should be able to produce viable offspring if they mated, the main concern for an animal!
Of course, breeds are an issue for animals in as far as domesticated breeds might have characteristics that make it harder for them to survive in the wild. (Which assumes that most of them would have the chance to try, which wouldn't be practical anyway).
Bear in mind that wild animals don't have a "purpose" either, or rather, they don't have a human-defined "purpose". But, of course, that isn't their concern any more than a human defines her "purpose" and value in terms of what (e.g.) a wild boar thinks(!)
Back to the question... The logical answer in *this* case would be... well, yes, most of the animals will have to die, but they'd have been killed eventually anyway. Whether it would then be morally acceptable to eat the meat of these animals is a different question.
Not saying that this is my position (as I said, I'm not even vegetarian), just that it's a reasonable response to the point you made.
I don't recall any media telling us we should eat meat, any more than a Quorn advert is telling us we should eat pretend-meat.
Also, I don't recall meat eaters accusing vegetarians/vegans of being the equivalent of paedophiles or Nazis. When that happens, I fully expect there to be a thread about it!
You owe me a keyboard, Super_Steve, this one is full of tea! Should I ever meet Morrissey (let's hope not) I shall discuss your theory with him, before taking a big munch of my sarnie which may or may not contain meat.
free speech cuts both ways.
morrisey can say what he like. and i can call him a **** for it. for saying i am as bad as a paedophile.
i'm sure you can find examples where people have said on here that you are as bad as a paedophile. and you will doubtless provide examples. or withdraw your statement.
I can't see why it would be immoral to eat an animal's flesh. Wild animals eat the flesh of other animals so why shouldn't we? We're animals as well.
Paul McCartney's attitude is completely, utterly different. Much more 'try a meat free day once a week'. He certainly doesn't go around saying he would walk away from meat eaters!! He has principles and beliefs and cares passionately about animals but he's not a 'tool' with it.
Yes, agreed! Hilarious how many people get offended by his blatant trolling. You can't take anything he says remotely seriously, for example he mentions in that interview that he walks away from ANYBODY who eats meat. This is blatantly untrue. He has a massive family with about 5 or 6 sisters and countless nieces and nephews, you're telling me not one of these would be a meat eater? Guy's a wind up merchant, particularly with the press, and the great unwashed just keep swimming around those barrels waiting to be shot.
Humans are meant to be more evolved. Evolved enough to have compassion.
But humans are no longer cavemen. We have luxuries like Supermarkets which give us more choice in our diet.