You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #23: Wow, how completely ridiculous. Bad premise. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
yewberry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-13-08 12:36 AM
Response to Original message
23. Wow, how completely ridiculous. Bad premise.
I have been veg*n for more than 20 years, and I've never actually known anyone who advocated outlawing meat-eating. It's simply not a conversation that comes up. Why? Because it's silly and unrealistic. The people who make this argument are usually either very new evangelistic veg*ns or (far more often) people determined to try to make veg*ns look stupid or short-sighted.

So, okay.

1) That would never happen. Many of us hope that people will choose to give up meat or eat less of it for a variety of reasons. But please, feel free to point out the legislation you've run across that we've put forth to outlaw meat. I mean, there must be actual cases of this being tried, given how often meat-eaters accuse us of it, right? Please post your sources.

2) {Faulty premise} There is a food crisis playing out in the world right now, but it's unrelated to the notion of sudden forced veg*nism. In fact, if more people gave up a meat-based diet, there would be less hunger in the world.

3) {Faulty premise} Are you actually using the idea of a global, instant conversion to veg*nism as a basis for this argument? Uh, yeah. Again, that's silly and unrealistic. If more people gave up meat, there'd be a slow tapering off of feed and land used for livestock. Cows and chickens will never be let loose to fend for themselves.

4) {Faulty analysis} Um, you do know that the vast majority of land currently being used for raising crops is for animal feed, right? And that crops grown as animal feed use far more pesticides than those meant for human consumption? "Extra farmland" indeed.

5) {Faulty premise} What, all the hunters in the world are going to magically stop hunting? Riiight.

6) {Faulty premise} While I'd personally be very, very happy to see the fur industry go the way of the buggy-making industry, again, this is not going to happen. Immediate global veganism isn't going to happen. We know that and you know that.

OK. Given the fact that your premise is completely unrealistic and biased against veg*ns, what are you really trying to say about us?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC