Cognitive Dissonance

[Foxfyre]

Again I notice you refuse to discuss what fetal rights of personhood entails

I will discuss that on a fetal rights of personhood thread. Your thread is about cognitive dissonance. Two entirely different things.

When it comes to whether abortion is cruel to the baby, the law or rights matter squat. And you do not seem to wish to discuss that.

 

[Blues Man]

I will discuss that on a fetal rights of personhood thread. Your thread is about cognitive dissonance. Two entirely different things.

When it comes to whether abortion is cruel to the baby, the law or rights matter squat. And you do not seem to wish to discuss that.

If it's my thread the conversation can go anywhere I want it to.

Conversations evolve into other subjects naturally.

The perceived cruelty of nature isn't about cognitive dissonance but I'm not telling you to start another thread on it am I?

 

[Foxfyre]

Yet you just made the statement that almost all vegans support abortion with no restrictions.

Isn't that presuming to tell vegans what they profess admit or tolerate?

I'll give you that one. I was out of line to say almost all vegans.

But with the exception of Buttercup who earlier said she is pro life, all the vegans I know are pro choice and think it should be the woman's choice and abortion should not be restricted by law. If you google vegans and abortion it would appear that most vegans do support abortion. You yourself seem to be pro choice since you are arguing so adamantly to justify it.

So I think I am probably on solid ground when I say most vegans are pro choice but could miss the mark when I say almost all vegans are pro choice.

You argue that its okay to kill that baby in the womb because it doesn't know anything. Neither does an animal know it is about to be killed or probably know what death is. And if it is killed compassionately it is quick, certain, and without pain or trauma to the animal.

 

[Foxfyre]

If it's my thread the conversation can go anywhere I want it to.

Conversations evolve into other subjects naturally.

The perceived cruelty of nature isn't about cognitive dissonance but I'm not telling you to start another thread on it am I?

In my opinion it is cognitive dissonance to believe humanely killing an animal for food is cruel but it isn't cruel when one is torn apart by predators in the wild who sometimes don't bother eating their prey before they begin consuming it. Now you tell me. Given a choice, would a deer or elk prefer to go that way? Or quick and painless via the hunter's rifle?

And yes it is your thread. If you don't want any opinions that don't support your own expressed, tell me now and I'll hit the unwatch button and say no more here. It would have been more intellectually honest to have put in your OP that the discussion is for vegans only though.

 

[Foxfyre]

There's your imagination, then there's the reality.

You've been shown the reality many times. You choose to ignore the uncomfortable facts and dwell in your own comfortable imagination

Nobody is arguing that some practices of the meat and poultry industry are horrendous and indefensible. I have protested that many times.

But because some people are cruel and/or evil should not be extrapolated to ALL people who consume animal protein are cruel and/or evil. Because that simply is not true.

 

[Blues Man]

I'll give you that one. I was out of line to say almost all vegans.

But with the exception of Buttercup who earlier said she is pro life, all the vegans I know are pro choice and think it should be the woman's choice and abortion should not be restricted by law. If you google vegans and abortion it would appear that most vegans do support abortion. You yourself seem to be pro choice since you are arguing so adamantly to justify it.

So I think I am probably on solid ground when I say most vegans are pro choice but could miss the mark when I say almost all vegans are pro choice.

You argue that its okay to kill that baby in the womb because it doesn't know anything. Neither does an animal know it is about to be killed or probably know what death is. And if it is killed compassionately it is quick, certain, and without pain or trauma to the animal.

But I am pro choice with restrictions. I have never supported abortion on demand at any time during pregnancy and I have said as much in this thread.

And I'm not sure if the comparison of a fetus at 12 weeks or less to an animal that is a couple years old with a fully functioning nervous system and a recognized degree of sentience is a good one.

 

[jwoodie]

Parents have dominion and Stewardship over their children. Does that mean your children exist for you to abuse and exploit?

My children are not animals. Are yours?

 

[Blues Man]

In my opinion it is cognitive dissonance to believe humanely killing an animal for food is cruel but it isn't cruel when one is torn apart by predators in the wild.

And yes it is your thread. If you don't want any opinions that don't support your own expressed, tell me now and I'll hit the unwatch button and say no more here. It would have been more intellectually honest to have put in your OP that the discussion is for vegans only though.

Factory farming is not humane and that is where most meat products are sourced. And If eating meat is unnecessary there is no need to kill an animal for food at all. That's how I understand veganism as an ethical stance.



And I'm not one of those thread subject cops.

Conversations evolve from one topic to the next naturally. Questions lead to more questions. I think it adds more to the conversation than requiring everyone to go start another thread if we stray a little bit off topic.

 

[Blues Man]

My children are not animals. Are yours?

All humans are animals

Primates to be exact

 

[Foxfyre]

But I am pro choice with restrictions. I have never supported abortion on demand at any time during pregnancy and I have said as much in this thread.

But you see, that developing human in the womb is a living being with all the potential of any human being. Not a single one of us makes it into this world without undergoing that stage. So regardless of what restrictions are in place, aborting that baby ends a human life. And more often than not, that human life is ended because the mother did not want it for whatever reason.

Now I am one who is strongly pro life but not fanatical when it comes to abortion and I oppose too restrictive laws that prevent reasonable decisions between a woman and her doctor. But I do not for a minute pretend that it isn't really a human being that is being killed. I certainly won't use concepts of law or rights to pretend it isn't a human being that is being killed.

I certainly understand that animals must be killed in order to them to become food for other animals including humans. When animals kill animals for food, they are given no choice in whether they do it humanely or not. Nor do they care. I don't judge the predator because it does what come naturally to it, but it is just as cruel to their prey as if it was intentional to inflict maximum pain and suffering upon them.

Humans have the choice to kill their prey instantly and with no suffering to the animal.

I prefer the human way.

 

[Blues Man]

But you see, that developing human in the womb is a living being with all the potential of any human being. Not a single one of us makes it into this world without undergoing that stage. So regardless of what restrictions are in place, aborting that baby ends a human life. And more often than not, that human life is ended because the mother did not want it for whatever reason.

Now I am one who is strongly pro life but not fanatical when it comes to abortion and I oppose too restrictive laws that prevent reasonable decisions between a woman and her doctor. But I do not for a minute pretend that it isn't really a human being that is being killed. I certainly won't use concepts of law or rights to pretend it isn't a human being that is being killed.

I certainly understand that animals must be killed in order to them to become food for other animals including humans. When animals kill animals for food, they are given no choice in whether they do it humanely or not. Nor do they care. I don't judge the predator because it does what come naturally to it, but it is just as cruel to their prey as if it was intentional to inflict maximum pain and suffering upon them.

Humans have the choice to kill their prey instantly and with no suffering to the animal.

I prefer the human way.

Yes it is a potential person. When does it become an actual person?

My stance on that is when the nervous system is sufficiently developed so as to have the ability to acquire sentience. The only exceptions to the restriction would be to save the life of the mother or if there was some fatal or extremely debilitating abnormality that develops.

I disagree that animal must be killed for food because we can get all the nutrients we get from meat without eating meat at all. So if we don't have to kill animals for food why kill animals at all? And I understand that we live in a very rich and advanced society and that not everyone has that luxury.

Humans have the choice not to kill prey at all and I prefer that.

 

[jwoodie]

All humans are animals

So you place the same value on a mosquito as you do on a human?

 

[Blues Man]

So you place the same value on a mosquito as you do on a human?

It has nothing to do with value it's just a fact.

 

[Foxfyre]

Factory farming is not humane and that is where most meat products are sourced. And If eating meat is unnecessary there is no need to kill an animal for food at all. That's how I understand veganism as an ethical stance.



And I'm not one of those thread subject cops.

Conversations evolve from one topic to the next naturally. Questions lead to more questions. I think it adds more to the conversation than requiring everyone to go start another thread if we stray a little bit off topic.

Yes conversations evolve from one topic to the next naturally. But if I choose not to get completely off track of what the is topic of the conversation, most especially when it adds nothing to the discussion, oh well. I have not demanded that you discuss anything but give you the opportunity to do so. You keep trying to divert me to a different topic and I haven't taken that bait. That was not in any way in any disrespect to you but because I think the concept of cognitive dissonance to be interesting and don't want the topic diverted from that.

I don't think any law, rule, regulation, what rights exist affect cognitive dissonance in any way.

You also gave two entirely unrelated examples in your OP that suggested ALL sorts of cognitive dissonance could be discussed. But when it became obvious that your intent was to promote veganism I went along with that because there is a lot of room for cognitive dissonance.

And bottom line, people can be ethical and consistent in choosing veganism.
And people can be ethical and consistent who don't choose veganism.

 

[Foxfyre]

Yes it is a potential person. When does it become an actual person?

My stance on that is when the nervous system is sufficiently developed so as to have the ability to acquire sentience. The only exceptions to the restriction would be to save the life of the mother or if there was some fatal or extremely debilitating abnormality that develops.

I disagree that animal must be killed for food because we can get all the nutrients we get from meat without eating meat at all. So if we don't have to kill animals for food why kill animals at all? And I understand that we live in a very rich and advanced society and that not everyone has that luxury.

Humans have the choice not to kill prey at all and I prefer that.

All people do not have a choice to get complete protein from their food supply. Protein is a necessary component of the human diet. So would you have millions of people suffer or die of malnutrition rather than have them consume animal protein?

Yes vegans can be healthy if they have the know how and ability to combine foods in specific ways to provide complete proteins. But recent studies show that overall cases of anemia in vegans and vegetarians are measurably higher than in those who consume animal protein.

 

[buttercup]

My children are not animals.

And? I'm curious to know what your point is. Are you implying that animals shouldn't be treated with kindness and respect, because they're "just animals"?

 

[buttercup]

All people do not have a choice to get complete protein from their food supply. Protein is a necessary component of the human diet. So would you have millions of people suffer or die of malnutrition rather than have them consume animal protein?

Yes vegans can be healthy if they have the know how and ability to combine foods in specific ways to provide complete proteins. But recent studies show that overall cases of anemia in vegans and vegetarians are measurably higher than in those who consume animal protein.

Protein exists in all sorts of plantbased foods. It's not hard at all to get protein as a vegan.

Rice and beans are some of the least expensive meals, and there's your protein.

Quinoa is a complete protein.

People are always so concerned about protein, but protein is certainly NOT a problem in the US.

The actual problem is most people don't get enough fiber.

 

[buttercup]

I think there is probably a distribution and that your belief doesn't represent the full spectrum.

It's not a matter of "belief".... it's a demonstrably true fact that factory farms are a horrible place for animals, and the standard practices that take place every day are not even up for debate. It's just the reality, and you can see some of it for yourself if you had watched the videos I posted.

Here's a documentary to watch, if you really want to know...

 

[Foxfyre]

Protein exists in all sorts of plantbased foods. It's not hard at all to get protein as a vegan.

Rice and beans are some of the least expensive meals, and there's your protein.

Quinoa is a complete protein.

People are always so concerned about protein, but protein is certainly NOT a problem in the US.

The actual problem is most people don't get enough fiber.

I'm not arguing that vegans cannot be or aren't quite healthy in their food choices. Probably most in developed countries are. I do not in any way judge or fault those who make that choice.

But many, maybe most people on Earth have neither the knowledge to combine them or even access to all the foods that vegans have in the USA. To remove meat/fish/poultry from their diets would be to condemn them to serious malnutrition and/or death. Likewise would people who eat only beef and nothing else be extremely unhealthy. But there are studies of people who consume ONLY animal protein who are completely healthy.

The same rules simply do not work for every individual.

If we are intellectually honest, veganism or any other regimented diet is not the answer for everybody.

 

[buttercup]

I'm not arguing that vegans cannot be or aren't quite healthy in their food choices. Probably most in developed countries are. I do not in any way judge or fault those who make that choice.

But many, maybe most people on Earth have neither the knowledge to combine them or even access to all the foods that vegans have in the USA. To remove meat/fish/poultry from their diets would be to condemn them to serious malnutrition and/or death. Likewise would people who eat only beef and nothing else be extremely unhealthy. But there are studies of people who consume ONLY animal protein who are completely healthy.

The same rules simply do not work for every individual.

If we are intellectually honest, veganism or any other regimented diet is not the answer for everybody.

I know that's not what you were arguing. My point was that it's not as hard as you seem to think it is. You keep saying that it's difficult, even though we have told you that it's not.

In fact, in many places in the world very little meat is eaten, because it's more expensive. And in those parts of the world, people are healthy. In fact, in most of the world's "Blue Zones", the diets are mostly plantbased.

For example, in one of the Blue Zones, Loma Linda California, there are a lot of plantbased eaters because it's a place where there are a lot of Seventh Day Adventists.

As for the studies, again, I don't know where you heard that (you have to be careful with studies about food because it's a little-known fact that many of those types of "studies" are industry-funded.) Because from everything I've seen, it's the exact opposite.

Look into The China Study. Dr. T. Colin Campbell has done extensive research on this topic.

I believe that's because we were never meant to eat rotting corpses. It's not real food. I know that sounds like an outrageous thing to say, because in this world, it's as "natural" and common as breathing air, but the important thing is to go back to the very beginning and think about what we were designed to be. We were not designed to eat death. And eating death is what leads to death.