I dont think people should stop eating meat but the conditions in where the animals are kept needs to be regulated on a global scale.

There was a show on pork i seen recently and it was about how foreign pig farms aren't regulated in anyway, where as the UK ones are and the pigs get to run around freely. It basically said we should only eat UK pork as the pigs have a better standard of life compared to imported pork.

...and you believe in that kind of bullshit?

EU regulations on Pork farming haven't come into force yet but the British government already implemented them, whereas Denmark (if I recall correctly) and others have not.

So British pig farms are being out priced by those nations yet to implement the regulations since it's more expensive to raise pigs under them.

ok, to tired to argue with idiots. i'm sure all foreign pigs get treated horribly and only the uk does not do this -and that's the one reason you got told to eat uk meat... :X

Yeah, that was exactly my argument.

Of course they were saying to only eat British pork to get people to buy British pork.

But the reason why people aren't is because it's more expensive and it's more expensive because Britain implemented the EU regulations almost immediately whereas other EU nations chose to do it at the last possible moment.

So it's not bullshit as you put it.

funny how it's the exact same thing here :d but keep saving the uk one pig at a time.

Well, we don't seem to get German pork here so it's kinda irrelevant, no?

It's true that British pork was more expensive than some other EU nations that were being imported because of the early implementation of EU regulations.

Some people care about how the meat is raised so the obvious advice was to buy British despite the higher price, with the added benefit of supporting the UK economy. I've no idea if that's still the case or not though since it was a couple of years ago when it got a lot of press over here.

Explain how that was "bullshit".

Also, I don't actually give a fuck about where pork comes from or stupid British farmers anyway :P

me neither... sorry for the mad hangover induced rage :>

Hey don't rage that we're morally superior, just stop being cunts to animals.

jesus

As Vincent Vega said: "Sausages taste good. Pork chops taste good."

Veggie since '96

o7

Veggie since '85

haven't put a steak on a grill since late summer 2009

pussy!

you're gonna have to take that back as soon as it gets a bit warmer

January was warm enough.

pussy!

Unfortunately i haven't been eating that quite as long

g1

You were raised as one, props! :)

Fuck off you're always eating bacon, prick.

pussy!

Well, you can always start eating less meat, avoiding cheap products. If you live in the right place, you can directly buy meat from cattle farmers. Or if you leave somewhere where the only option is to go in a big mall and you don't trust a brand over the others, you can stop eating meat to avoid supporting this industry.

I will look into it, doesn't change the fact that its still going on.

eat happy pigs!

They say the grinch's heart grew three sizes that day.

See I would be, but I just like blood too much. Vegetarian food just tastes like a side-dish...
Give me a cheap alternative and I'll take it :)

British/EU farms are way better as they have much stricter regulations.

everything british is better because it is british.

Estonian calling me poor, I could buy your mother for a blanket and a loaf of bread.

I bought your mother for a fiver. Wasn't worth it.

Jamerio is so poor that he can only afford mother jokes.

im not estonian and im not calling u poor, im callin u culturally challenged thats all

im not estonian and im calling you poor

I like meat, i dont care how it got on to my plate.

you should if it's injected with hormones, stressed out etc.

My insight is this:

It's human nature to be carnivorous (well, omnivorous c: ) and that's the way it was for millenia. The processes of the meat industry are basically an extension of what our caveman ancestors did chasing the antelope. Main difference only being evolution of process... Before it was spear to face to feed family, now its hanged by feet and machete to face to feed millions of consumers. Also OMG LIONS ARE CARNIVORES TOO, THEY KILL PREY, LETS ALL FORM A SUPPORT GROUP c:

Yes, this video was fucked up to see, but seeing it was on a level of the several hundred youtube videos such as "LOL look my pet snake is eating this live mouse" and several other scenes of that calibre. Which of those is TRULY more disturbing? An evolved hunter-gatherer response or "OH LETS WATCH OUR PETS HUNT AND TORTURE SMALLER ANIMALS AND THEN TAKE VIDEOS AND UPLOAD TO YOUTUBE". (don't get me started on insects and spiders and shit :D)

In China ( a MAJOR player in the food and fur producing industry), animals are known to be skinned alive in order to cut costs. it's fucked up for sure. Won't stop me from eating meat.

Hate vegetarians/vegans etc who go on about cruelty to animals but have pets as if that's fine too.

I agree about hating vegetarians who bang on about animal cruelty but saying keeping pets is cruel is like saying not dumping a baby in the woods is cruel because you never technically gave it the choice. Life in the wild is fucked up, keeping pets isn't inherently cruel.

Naturally it isn't all inherently cruel, but a lot of it is.

Raising animals for dairy or eggs isn't inherently cruel either though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKTsAy5FBuY

I have no idea what relevance that has other than I would dump that baby in the woods, after many years it would develop a split personality and set off for a selfish quest to find a magical ring.

weirdest thing, though:

Vegetarians that use the land per food argument, yet have a dog.

Bet they all live in the city too.

All of our features show that we're herbivores, though - eyes in the front, mostly flat teeth (with our canines likely evolving in after our intelligence allowed us to eat meat), poor hearing/vision, no sharp claws or spikes, slow movement, etc... I think any animal would be omnivorous, if it had the choice like we do.

how are eyes in the front a herbivore trait...

almost all carnivores have forward facing eyes (depth perception) whereas herbivores have have eyes facing sideways for greater fov

Carnivores mostly have eyes on the sides of their head, and herbivores do not.

errr, no.

http://comeholyspirit-tkc.com/blog/wp-content...mb-big.jpg

one random pic to prove you wrong. Do you seriously want me to find more pics, or cite a source proving i'm right, or will you just admit you're a retard and stfu pls?

mostly != all

ok. name carnivores with sideways facing eyes.

Here are some with forward facing eyes:
All felines
All canines
All other mammalian predators

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=animals

lol@ weak lmgtfy attempt. I guess thats as close as anyone will ever get you to admit you're blatantly wrong.

You're trying to have a debate on something that isn't.

lol :) weak deflection

Weak trolling.

nono. the point is you made a blatantly wrong statement and your infantile troll mentality is so ingrained that you can't admit you were wrong. Amusing :)

As I said - weak.

kinda obvious that sounds weak to you as you must have heard that a hundred times by now.

Well, there are a lot of weak trolls on this forum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnivore#Charac...carnivores

birds of prey

PS the big animal in the picture is called a LION, and is a carnivore, i.e. it eats meat that it acquires by hunting other animals. The small animal in the picture is a LAMB, or infant sheep, and is a herbivore, which means it eats plants.

you are trying to have a discussion over something which is not

wow, that just sent some chills down my spine... just typing that alone.. so evil

Also sounds like the opposite of what I've heard, although I haven't looked it up so I'm not claiming to know for sure. I thought that herbivores more often have eyes at the sides of their heads for wider vision, useful for spotting predators.

It's more dependent on the environment than the fact they eat/do no eat a certain type of fuel.

Naturally there's more instances where forward facing eyes are required by hunters though.

And one great big fucking brain that has a rapacious appetite for violence, bloodshed and burgers.

MMMmmm burgers OM NOM NOM

actually, i think most anthropologists are of the opinion that our switch to omniverous behavior was made before the development of our brains.

That said, i dont know why i would argue this with you seeing as you made a totally false assertion with the 'carnivores have eyes in the side of their head'. Whats more is that you refuse to realise that you were wrong about it...

No.

vedic is the local anti-science nutjob. Don't bother with him.

http://beachchairscientist.files.wordpress.co...rhead2.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/wildlifeweb/bird/bald...e_01tk.jpg
Hmmm...

Do you mean our brains or what? because plenty of apes eat meat, they just don't hunt for hunt and some of them are hardly particularly intelligent.

i dont know the exact reasoning or mechanics behind it, i saw something on the subject a few years ago.

also, have you ever wondered why our stomachs are so fragile compared to other animals. I cant remember the reason but its got something to do with our brain using all the resources during development or something like that.

Our stomachs are more likely to be "fragile" because as gatherer/scavengers the diet was a mix of all sorts of food that we then cooked, which breaks down food in advance so the need for a robust digestive system wasn't an important survival factor.

Whereas having the intelligence to exploit any and every opportunity for food was. I guess that's what you mean though?

From what I know it still is undecided what came first: Evolution of the brain or eating meat.

But almost anthropologists seem to agree that eating meat helped to evolve the brain even further.

i cant help but prefer food that had relatives.

Spoiled city brat.

peta is bullshit

There's something called a food chain, is there not?

Even ignoring that, what are we supposed to do, take care of the cows in some gummy-bear-rainbow field where all the grass is green and everything is bright and sunny, and we nicely walk the cows to a cozy bed where we feed it a sleeping pill then inject it with some poison so it falls asleep happily and doesn't feel a thing as we pat its head and hug it and wish it a good night?

No. Assembly line of cows. Giant knifes. Done.

They want you to not eat meat, they think all land that is used for raising animals can sufficiently support vegetables and fruit...

We need meat. It's a part of nature, it's how a food chain works, we need the protein. What, we're going to change the way we've been living for hundreds of thousands of years and risk earlier deaths because some hipsters don't like the pain we're inducing to animals? Every other animal can hunt down anything it wants, kill it, and eat it, but we can't?

ALLTIMES PATHETIC

Whilst I'm sure there's stuck up veggie fucks in that group that want to force people to stop eating meat, I think the video was more about the conditions and treatment the livestock receives (for example, shitty living conditions, being fattened up un-naturally etc).

To be honest, free-range/organic stuff tastes better (most the time...) anyway. It's just cheaper for them to mass-produce crap like this.

I'm no veggie, but humans certainly do not NEED meat.

There are plenty of alternatives.

yeah, like sucking

There's many studies that the protein from meat is NEEDED by humans. It was in our evolution process (One of the theories as to why humans brains doubled in size over thousands of years) and there's also been studies that show over some generations, restriction of meat protein reduces brain size and development.

BOO HOO COWS FEEL PAIN

It's exactly like the scene from Donnie Darko. These animals did nothing to further help evolution, they did nothing to advance technology, they're mindless animals that don't fear death, that can't speak, or accomplish anything that benefits anyone. Why should we mourn the death of any animal that isn't human. Because we think they're cute? It doesn't matter in the end. Lions eat Zebras, sharks eat fish, snakes eat mice. Same shit, different animal.

...did nothing to further help evolution, they did nothing to advance technology, they're mindless animals that don't feat death, that can't speak, or accomplish anything that benefits anyone.

Since this all applies to you, can we eat you?

I was wondering when 'Mr. I Act Like I Know Everything' would chime in.

Since you can't even answer a question, I'll take that as a yes. Surrender your insides.

I'm not going answer a question to which you already act like you know the answer to.

By the way, I was talking about certain types of animal, not specific animals. You'd be witty if you actually read things through properly.

There are no terms for your surrender. Insides. Outside. Now.

Don't admit your mistakes, just pretend that they never happened!

Less talk, more grill.

edit: In fact, you are now Grillz.

fun fact:

humans have always eaten meat, but not in the masses as we do today.

400 years ago people would also eat meat occasionally. but today you eat meat every day, thats not how it is intended.

the meat-eating-habit originated after the 30-year war from 1618 after which the plague spread over wide areas of europe, many people died and crop had to be destroyed.

the alternative back then was eating meat, because nothing else available, at least not without being at risk of dying.

after that the habbit stuck and today we eat meat every day and consider it part of a nutricious meal.

in reality, eating meat once a week is healthy enough and has been upto 400 years ago.

Nah, man, youve got it all wrong. WeŽve always eaten as much meat as we do today. If you dont eat meat your brain dies!

Think of it like this, 1 kg meat/year gives you 1 intelligence point out of 100, so the average European reaches the level 30. This makes us, as been shown many times before, way inferior to the average North American. The average North American reaches a whopping level 110 - thats 10 more levels than whats even possible. However, we should not feel so bad, theres really retarded people in the world too, that only ever reaches level 1! The average Indian only eats 1 kg meat/year - and it shows!

To illustrate, I want you to consider this, our friendly North American Gillz - he probably is around level 110, and he has concluded that since animals die anyway, unlike the rest of us, they may aswell suffer in the meantime.

Then theres you, level 30, and it shows, believing that we didnt always eat this much meat, go back to school mate!

And last, and definitely least, theres morons like that Indian ashr, that thinks it worthwile to make super awesome quake movies and probably lots of other stupid things.

I hope Ive been of some assistance to you, remember, its not your fault that you didnt know this, its the amount of meat youve eaten thats the problem.

if i understand you correctly, your last sentence is wrong, because it's more likely the amount of meat i've NOT eaten that's causing me to misunderstand.

Thats the lack of meat talking.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Q-fUXwQJaA

OM NOM NOM 15kg of meat a week

It depends on your genetics. Our metabolic type varies. That's why diet fads come and go because we're all different.

* humans have changed the way they've been living countless times, and will continue to do so with higher and higher frequency of changes
* we're hardly part of a food chain, no one's eating us and most of the animals or plants we eat only ever existed in the first place because we grew them to eat them afterwards.
* it's a balance of what you want how badly vs what you are willed to spend on it, why care about suffering of children working in the 'industry' in 3rd world? can't hear them moan or scream over here while wearing the cheaply manufactured clothes anyway, rather save some moneyz?!?
* no we can't hunt down anything we want, kill it and eat it. first of all there's not enough usable ground to grow enough food to feed enough cows/pigs/chickens to then provide meat to the whole world population. and secondly, unlike animals us humans have always found ways to breach natural borders and grow in numbers beyond any limits, affecting food chain balance/nature like no other being can.

* humans have changed the way they've been living countless times, and will continue to do so with higher and higher frequency of changes

Correct, but not eating meat would be a change for the worse. I've already explained the biological effects of not eating meat in other posts.

* it's a balance of what you want how badly vs what you are willed to spend on it, why care about suffering of children working in the 'industry' in 3rd world? can't hear them moan or scream over here while wearing the cheaply manufactured clothes anyway, rather save some moneyz?!?

This is different, because those are human beings. People that can grow up do great things for the world (although not likely in those situations). What has cows, chickens, and fish done for us? Have they engineered ways to make this world better? Are they the ones working on cures for diseases?

You've not "explained" anything, you said "this is true, there are studies" with no reference to what studies.

Neither have they. When they attack I'll defend.

Meat not being an essential part of the human diet is self-evident, you can live, as many have done, without ever eat meat in your life providing you eat the correct replacements.

Your assertion that it is needed and that "there's also been studies that show over some generations, restriction of meat protein reduces brain size and development" does require proof of evidence since it is certainly not self evident.

It doesn't even seem to make much sense, but I guess that's a given with you.

Ooo, a personal attack, what a way to prove your point.

http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/reprint/117/11/1844.pdf

http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/200404/...022360.php

Abstract;We studied the effect of Meat Protein as a context of amino acid nutrient on Brain function and regeneration. A series of recent studies have shown that IGF-1, one of growth hormones, plays an important role on the regeneration of nervous system. The blood concentration of IGF-1 is regulated by nutrient condition, especially by the amino acid nutrient. Therefore, Meat Protein could promote neuronal regeneration via the up-regulation of IGF-1 homeostasis. In this study, we used the two formulae: control diet(MF) and Meat Protein-rich(MP) diet. Nestin-GFP mice were fed with each diet for 14 days, and were applied with BrdU on last 10 days, and each brain was dissected out from each mouse. Cerebral slice(40 micron) was cut by cryostat, and each slice was stained with both anti-GFP and anti-BrdU. Number of nestin+ cells per 1mm3 in cerebral cortex of control(MF) group and experimental(MP) group was 442 and 471, respectively. In addition, the frequency for nestin+ dividing cells per total dividing cells in MF group and MP group was 50% versus 72%. These results indicate that Meat Protein promotes the generation of neural precursor cells in mammalian cerebral neocortex, center of our intelligence. Our study suggests that Meat Protein enhances the Brain function and activity by promoting the regeneration of nervous system. (author abst.)

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/87/5/1567S

Data indicate that various protein sources may exhibit different effects on bone metabolism. Some, but not all (22), studies have found that meat as a protein source is associated with higher serum levels of IGF-1 (20, 21), which is in turn associated with increased bone mineralization and fewer fractures (23)

IGF-1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insulin-like_growth_factor_1

http://www.fasebj.org/cgi/content/meeting_abs...acts/883.8

Contrary to our hypothesis there was no association between fasting serum IGF-1 concentrations and total protein intake. However, fasting serum IGF-1 concentrations were different in males between low and high poultry protein consumers

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC549378/

http://mcb.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/25/5/1869

Like Akt1, Akt3 is not required for the maintenance of normal carbohydrate metabolism but is essential for the attainment of normal organ size. However, in contrast to Akt1–/– mice, which display a proportional decrease in the sizes of all organs, Akt3–/– mice present a selective 20% decrease in brain size. Moreover, although Akt1- and Akt3-deficient brains are reduced in size to approximately the same degree, the absence of Akt1 leads to a reduction in cell number, whereas the lack of Akt3 results in smaller and fewer cells.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AKT

http://www.pnas.org/content/105/16/6133.full

http://mcb.asm.org/cgi/reprint/25/5/1869.pdf

give this guy jamerio status already.

What point was I trying to prove?

It was sarcasm idiot

Irrelevant sarcasm, such great intelligence you are exhibiting.

"It doesn't even seem to make much sense, but I guess that's a given with you."

Irrelevant statement, such great intelligence you are exhibiting.

You do realise you can get protein from non-meat sources?

Yes, but you need to then double your intake of those items (Whether it be Yoghurt, cheese, etc) in order to make up for what's being lost with the meat.

From what I've seen from vegetarians (I've talked to many, there's a lot at colleges) they don't makeup for the protein, or iron. They just eat as they would without meat.

Most of these people are environmental freaks who also give blood. A week or two before they give blood they stock up on foods that have lots of iron, and eat them as much as possible, so that they can pass the iron test at the blood center (If you don't have enough iron you can't give blood).

My point is that the majority of these people aren't making up for the loss of nutrients from meat. They're hurting their bodies in the long run, and for what? It just brings me back to my previous point, fuck the animals. We evolved and got where we are today by eating cows, pigs, chickens, etc. In all honesty, I don't see the intelligence in being a vegetarian. You're hurting your body, and you're not even affecting the meat industry. It's not like there's X amount of cows NOT getting killed in a year because of vegetarians. 90% of agricultural resources are to meat, which is why salads at fast food places are so expensive. These vegetarians aren't making a stand for anyone. The cows will continue to be killed the way they've always been, same with the chickens, and any other animal that we eat.

So what you're now saying is that you can eat vegetables alone, and be perfectly fine, but many people don't... or was it

There's many studies that the protein from meat is NEEDED by humans.

Oops.

[quote]It was in our evolution process (One of the theories as to why humans brains doubled in size over thousands of years) and there's also been studies that show over some generations, restriction of meat protein reduces brain size and development.[/quote[

So, theories? Theories that you didn't link to, while the links you paste don't support those theories AT ALL.

Is all Canadian science this bad, or just Gillz?

Are you fucking stupid? The links I put clearly show the studies done, and the research articles have REFERENCES CITED

Why don't you actually READ the articles. You cannot be this stupid.

http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/reprint/117/11/1844.pdf
http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/200404/...022360.php
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/87/5/1567S
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insulin-like_growth_factor_1
http://www.fasebj.org/cgi/content/meeting_abs...acts/883.8
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC549378/
http://mcb.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/25/5/1869
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AKT
http://www.pnas.org/content/105/16/6133.full
http://mcb.asm.org/cgi/reprint/25/5/1869.pdf

Linking to the same incorrect articles doesn't make your argument any less wrong.

GG not ready anything I posted. Wait, does idiot american Vedic not know of IGF-1 and ATK 1-3?

You're a shit troll, fuck off.

I read each link, actually. Your attempts to pile a ton of information on the (already pointless) argument have failed.

I'm not even against eating meat - it's just that your arguments are completely retarded.

You can live without meat, but you're right in a way; it's unhealthy.

Yeah, if you eat unhealthily you will end up unhealthy.

Same goes for meat eaters too.

None of these links show a requirement, and none of them even manage to make direct links in their studies.

Here is an equally useful medical paper.

I hear pidgeon sommeliers are all the rage this season.

The point is: no one gives a fuck about what's going on regarding child labour, poverty or starvation, when we actually should (as you stated yourself). Some people don't care about how humans are treated as long as it's not themselves/relatives/friends/next door, some care about them, some even care for animals, some even for plants. Just because you don't care about possible pains of animals doesn't mean no one else does either, or that it doesn't exist or is a non-issue.

freakin treehuggers.

haha xD

Just because you don't care about possible pains of animals doesn't mean no one else does either, or that it doesn't exist or is a non-issue

The problem is that there's a certain level of justified caring. You can't care about every single insect that exists, you can't care about every single pigeon, without being mocked or ridiculed in some way. Although your caring might feel justified, to everyone else it probably isn't.

Yes, this would also apply to exactly how I think, but I think it's just ridiculous to think that anything will change. No company will spend the time or money to change anything at all, it's too efficient at this point. The cows are being killed, the pigs, the chickens, so the process its self is now redundant. Everyone knows the animals will be dead, yes torture is bad, but it's not like companies are actually focusing their resources to animal torture.

that's why economy without rulesets is retarded, congratulations to your conclusion. still, where you draw the line is not necessarily where others draw the line, and apparently there's many people who draw it at a different level.

I think he spent many years not eating meat and his brain didn't grow because meat makes it twice the size over generations.

Now he wants his brain to grow.

that's why economy without rulesets is retarded, congratulations to your conclusion

Wasn't really the argument now was it?

Yes, this would also apply to exactly how I think, but I think it's just ridiculous to think that anything will change. No company will spend the time or money to change anything at all, it's too efficient at this point.

that's why you need regulations by law to make sure no one can dodge this and get an advantage out of worse treatment (it being cheaper). if we don't care, we don't need these regulations. apparently we got some and tendency is that they're getting more and more strict, so apparently some people do care and it's not all set in stone. but don't expect ze free marketz to fix it.

?????

Free market solves everything m8, didn't you know?

only in amurica, land of freedoom

Every other animal can hunt down anything it wants, kill it, and eat it, but we can't?

With great power comes great responsibility.

i fucking love mcdonalds tbh

Jamerio is so poor that he can't afford meat therefore declaring himself a vegetarian.

+

Carnivores do not need slogans.

i have long accepted that my food is killed and gruesomely taken apart. we'll all die someday just like these animals, maybe we'll even not have the pleasure of dying quickly. apart from that, someone's joy is always someone else's pain, so what the hell - im not gonna stop what i like doing because i someone or something else

Humans got fucked the day they invented farming. Hunter gatherer we are meant to be, not 7 billion lazy ass bitches eating pasta and veggies. RAW BLOODY MEAT + blueberries thx.

Solve human obesity - hunt your own food


Fuck it. Lets go Ted Nugent!

with spears preferably.

I would rather see someone hunt Ted Nugent.

dont know for sure but I think being omnivorous or herbivorous is a thing enforced by habitat of the creature, eg, chimpanzees are omnivore but bonobos are more towards herbivore, though they are essentially the same species. The human diet has also been decided like that so we should not make a big fuss about it.

we did not climb through evolution to the top of food chain to become vegetarians

rofl vegetarians

meat tastes sooooooo much better when it's free-range anyway =)

(and by free-range I DON'T mean it by the USA definition which is just giving the animals some time outside.)

hahaha

fuck just eat meat. i need some protein man. the world is fucked up already so why give a damn.

I think your cock is not so hard while watching cooller play if you are a veggie

alltimes meaty.

Eat Jesus instead:
http://twitpic.com/qipp2/full

So what about animal testing in science? You're gonna stop eating meds so you can protest against that as well. Because I can tell you one thing, ALL medicines, are tested on animals, there are no exceptions.

uh yea but that's not done on any of the cute animals like puppies or dolphins but rats or some other shit. if they ain't cute they can just fuck right off as far as I'm concerned.

guess we can sign u up for any test anyone wants ^__^

Lol I don't give a shit, meat is delicious..

im not gonna stop eatin cock, however its made.

How come no1's mentioning cruelty against plant life?
I mean plants and vegetables are living oragnisms who, as far as we know, can very much experience pain and terror. Just because you don't hear and see a plant screaming and kicking it's ass of it doesn't mean it's not hurting.
Vegetarians suck.

As far as we know? Plants are about as alive as fire.

eat fire then...

Totally shot down my argument there, I might actually leave the site I dunno

arguing with some1 who doesn't even know the basics such as a plant being an living organism is an overkill for me.

You are unusually dense.

ur unusually fat.

In many ways that's what protected me from the priests when I was young.

so that's why you seek attention, you feel rejected.

and yes not all priests are like that.

Yeah it's not like the leader of them all actively protects the ones that are though.

When a doctor or a soldier makes a mistake and maims/kills a person I hardly see any leader (the president, ministry of health, general etc.) apologizing for it.

Like everyone in this world the church has enemies as well. There are people who will go to great lengths to make the church look bad. All these crimes that are apparently commited are rarely proven but the damage has been done.
You do have to recognize the difference between the church and God.
The church is just and institution made up of people, and people are sinful. So yes there can be crimes like in every other institution. This probably affects people more since they expect everything about the church to be good. Unfortunately, it's not always so. Still that does not have to discourage you to believe.

On the other hand some people despise everything about God and the Holy Bible because it makes them look and feel sinful. Things they feel comfortable doing are condamned by God so instead of giving up their sinful behaviour they rather blasphemies God and everything about it.

Yeah that's probably why he denied it instead of giving a non-specific apology.

Oh wait.

You and I are hardly in a position to judge about a case we know little about. News media is hardly a trustworthy source.
And as for him, unlike many others he did apologize for many bad and horrible things the church and people in the name of the church have done in the past.
You also must consider the fact that time is something very relative in 'churches' terms. It takes years and years for certain things to be acknowledged.

No, time is relative in scientific terms.

of course since science is relative.

No.

All of you people have gotten the wrong end of the proverbial stick
Not eating meat is not about "Bessie/Porky is so cute I can't fathom him/her getting fragged"
It's about sustainability on the global, the only one there is, scale.

It's about being an adult human being and taking responsibilty for one's actions.

None of us can't escape earth.

*ninja flame edit*

Via2maximus sucks anyways, catholic, lol.

That video linked was only about how we harm animals.

Aye, it was, I was just trying to inject some sensibility in to the rampantly trollish dis-cussion here ;D

tell that to the dinosaurs... last time I checked they were dead vegans!

Isn't your world only 2000 years old?

Raptor Jesus calling.

my world is old since God created it.

god doesn't believe in dinosaurs

isnt world like 5000 years old according to god ?

God is the creator of everything and since this world is at least 4.5 billion yrs old I guess that's slightly older than 5000yrs...

Well, not exactly everything, since man created god but god says otherwise. its a paradox !!

"god says otherwise" so you do acknowledge His existance. I wouldn't call it a paradox more like an insufficient amount of open-mindedness towards enlightenment.

i do not. By quoting a character in a fantasy book doesnt mean i acknowledge its existence.

if I gave you a book about quantum physics (considering that's not your field of interest), would you call it a fantasy book? What if u went back in time for lets say 500 yrs and gave a book about airplanes to some1? They would probably call it a fantasy book.
Lack of knowledge and understanding doesn't make a certain thing a fantasy.

Bad example to be honest. They can see birds and insects flying. I doubt they thought it was magic...

funny you should say that since birds and insects were quite frequently used as fantasy characters.
I don't really understand what you were actually pointing out.
Leonardo da Vinci had the blueprints for tanks and planes (a helicopte if you want to be more precise) and it took the world 400yrs to actually materialize them.

Can I see the plans "god" had for earth? I'm not sure he followed them correctly.

Take note that I put quotation marks on "god". I don't want you to go around saying I acknowledge this "god" because I typed his name or whatever on an internet forum.

no1 can be sure of anything that's for sure except God of course.

Trolls and religious people, you all look the same to me.

no, since quantum physics are things that are real, in this world and not in some delirious sick mans mind.

add: And oh... (well i have never read any quantum physic book) they usually dont have main characters doing stuff and commanding people, its about mathematics.

and how do you recognize what's real and what's fiction if you don't understand either?
like I said what seems fiction to you now may very well be real.

when u can explain why and how something happens u can take it as a fact, until proven otherwise. Unlike bible, which says that just is and no questions asked, its called bullshit.

lets say I supply you with a meal. you know it's for eating. you recognize the ingredients. you may very well know a lot about them; how they grow, vitamines, proteins, how they were cooked/baked/fried etc.
but can you tell me who made the meal?

I cant see the relevance here... who cares who made it ?

i'm just saying that u can have all the facts and still can't answer a simple question that actually isn't that simple...

and mostly its not even important.

since this world is at least 4.5 billion yrs old

Good to see you unquestioningly accept any scientific research which doesn't clash with your superstitions.

Who's to say what time is though? 5000 years could be 10 billion years to them. Could be 5 minutes for all we know. Calendars differ. Noah was apparently 950 years old when he died. Do we really literally take that to be just under 350,000 days or just a number they plucked out of the sky?

Ofc, it's all bullshit by any stretch, but I'm just saying that using our calendar time is irrelevant.

I agree with you on perceiving time. Some say God doesn't percieve time as we do and what seems slow and old to us it might very well be fast for Him.

I think the problem lies in that you are referring to 'God' as a person (and more interestingly, a man).

What evidence do you have to show that 'God' is a man? Let alone a human at all? The Bible? The theory that he would have modeled the human race on himself? Because if that's the case, who created 'him'? And who did that person model itself on? If 'he' was modeled on a human at all, it would be more logical to have been a woman (that is, to give birth to everything... Hense the phrase mother nature) but I guess that would be against pretty much any religion aye ;)

Which came first. The chicken or the egg?

evidence? what evidence do you have of love? can you prove u love some1? what about when your parents/friends believe in you for reaching a certain goal? can you prove their faith in you? hardly.
God isn't a man. God is a Holy Spirit that's infinite. Since something is infinite in eternity you can't find it's beginning or end.
A mother nurtures and takes care of but can't create. You have to have the seeds for fruit and a woman is solely earth (not my intention to insult/degrade women this is just a reference for the sake of discussion) . To plant the seeds you need a man.

There will always be unanswered questions. Even if you some day do realize and find all the answers to all questions then
you will be so impressed with the mightiness you'll know what to believe in.

Love is an electrochemical reaction, as are all perceived emotions.

You are willing to merely accept that "god" is infinite, but you can't accept that the universe is infinite? This must be your first religious debate, and you're going to get stomped here.

:)

of course it's some sort of electrochem. reaction. but why does it happen? people could very well function without it. there's no actual use for it, yet it happens.
that's the main problem of science they can never provide a reason why certain things happen but only how they happen.
Also science is very relative and it's all about perception. what seems logical to some doesn't have to be to others.

btw where did I say that universe isn't infinite?

whats the point in knowing they whys ?

IF there really would be a god (which isnt) but lets play there is. Where does man need him ? world would be million times happier place without god, or any religion. Especially christianity which is established in europe with rape murder and blasphemy, wouldnt we be much more happier without it ?

I've never seen anyone act in a way that has been conceived by God. edit: actually I do know few people how are good souls but still in minority.
You're still forgetting that there is nothing evil about God and there's nothing evil that He would make people do. it's peoples own choice to do so. God is clearly against any evil and would like nothing more than just see people be good.
Also it's very interesting how no1 blames the devil for something evil that happens. everyone starts bashing God but no1 questions themselves about what they did wrong to actually deserve this misfortune. but that's devils greatest design, for everything bad that happens blame God and the more people he turns against God the better for him.

well, theres no actual evil/good in this world. Evil and good is in the eye of the beholder, its like an opinion. To me, god represents evil (even i dont actually believe in such thing).

i'm not sure what to make out of your comment... in my opinion anyone should know the difference between good and evil.
there are good deeds and evil deeds you really can't ignore that because they have exactly the opposit effect.

My point is, that evil and good is not like for example green and yellow. Yellow is yellow for everyone and green is green for everyone (well, not if youre colourblind tho...) but evil and good is not same for everyone.

I see and agree with you. the boundary between good and evil is ever so small. maybe if it was clearer to people then we wouldn't have so much pain in the world.

You're still forgetting that there is nothing evil about God and there's nothing evil that He would make people do.

+

Also it's very interesting how no1 blames the devil for something evil that happens. everyone starts bashing God but no1 questions themselves about what they did wrong to actually deserve this misfortune.

"If a priest's daughter defiles herself by becoming a prostitute, she disgraces her father; she must be burned in the fire." -Leviticus 21:9

"And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death." -Leviticus 24:16

"I will let loose among you the beasts of the field, which will bereave you of your children and destroy your cattle and reduce your number so that your roads lie deserted." -Leviticus 26:22

"when I sharpen my flashing sword and my hand grasps it in judgment, I will take vengeance on my adversaries and repay those who hate me." -Deuteronomy 32:41

"Elijah replied to the captain of fifty, "If I am a man of God, let fire come down from heaven and consume you and your fifty." Then fire came down from heaven and consumed him and his fifty." -2 Kings 1:10

"hen the angel of the LORD went out and put to death a hundred and eighty-five thousand men in the Assyrian camp. When the people got up the next morning—there were all the dead bodies!" -Isaiah 37:36

...and the list goes on... and on... and on... Vengeful, spiteful, hateful, jealous, oppressive, etc.. The only way you could say that the Judeo-Christian "god" isn't evil would be when you have invented a word that means "MORE EVIL THAN EVIL". The bible is an amazing piece of fiction, in that it's managed to make a fantasy character that is SO evil, no man could even hope to commit all of the atrocities that would live up to his name.

quoting the Bible achieves nothing really. i could easily take out quotes about how God is merciful, how He loves us etc etc...
The Bible sets examples and shows what happens to people who are evil. what you quoted is in relation to men who are not believers and who tempted God in proving His existence and so used His power to destroy their enemies.

The exact definition of "evil" is "morally objectionable behavior". It doesn't matter if he does some good stuff, he does it in the name of his evil.

The Judeo-Christian "God" destroyed the option of faith during the events in the bible, as revealing himself through actions takes away the ability to be objective. If all it took was insulting god and breaking rules to bring about supernatural retribution, he must have been on break for the past 2000 years.

As a morally sound human, YOU should be able to tell that these actions are morally repugnant. The fact that you can't just shows that you are as void of the ability to truly understand right and wrong as the fictitious deity that you ignorantly represent.

that is still not to say that it's not our fault. God once tried to destroy humans because they were sinful. He tried everything to actually save His 'creation' but it was not until His own Son died for humanity that then He realized there is still hope for us.
I think peoples own arrogance and self-indulgence blinds them from seeing the difference from right and wrong and from admitting their wrongdoings.

So, as an example, "god" had a child that he didn't know how to care for, was going to kill it because it didn't turn out well, and had to be talked out of it by someone ELSE... if it wasn't for intervention from his "son", he would have happily killed all the life that he had improperly "created" to begin with.

Ignoring the obvious imperfections of what is supposed to be a flawless being... Would you do the same thing in his shoes? Even as a flawed human being with a shred of morality, I'm sure you wouldn't.

we are His creation and He can very well do anything with it.
it might come out cruel but like you said, children, that makes me think of abortion and raising up children.

anyway, we could go on forever I guess, so im just gonna thank you and others that contrubuted to this discussion. even tho we disagree some valid points were made nonetheless. stay safe.

So you can kill your child, right? Don't like the way they turn out, and you'd be justified in killing them? I raise an animal and decide to kill them, and I'm justified?

You obviously lack any morals, since you try to excuse away atrocities with "ownership".

Now you can have a glimpse of what God has gone through.
if your child was killing your other child what would you do? stand by and do nothing? just let them kill eachother? you would have to choose and it wouldn't be easy and you can't even comprehend how difficulty it must have been for God.

No, I couldn't. If you're not responsible enough to know what to do with a child, you shouldn't HAVE a child.

You're basically saying that "god" has poor judgment in his decision to create life, poor judgment on what to do with his creations after the fact, and finally, poor judgment on what to do with them when he decided that we were not to his liking. Moral of the story: none.

When you have a child no1 knows how it will turn out. what you can TRY and do is to influence it. that's what God did.
every parent has different approaches on parenting a child and some we can approve and some we can't. but that doesn't mean in fact that the child will turn out to be bad or good. questioning anything about God is futile since everything we know turns out we actually know nothing. that has been proven many times and it happens to people on daily basis.
humans have free-will and they can do whatever they want with it.

"For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things."

Knoweth all... except that his creations would be a complete and total failure that he would have to destroy, until his perfect son (that he also created) came along and had to put him in his place.

If humans have free will, god cannot know everything, as it would mean that the future (in fact, time itself) is a limit to even god, and beyond his power. If god is above time, he already knows the result of any creation, and would have known that his creations would have been a failure.

That being the case, he made humans (knowing that they would be a failure) only to destroy them (which he knew he'd do) but was persuaded not to do so by his son (that he knew he'd create) to give us a chance (which he knew he'd do)... This same idiocy can be applied to all his creations. He purposely put Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden, and purposely put a tree that they couldn't eat from, knowing full well that they would since he designed them to do it in the first place.

Either you have free will, or "god" is an idiot. Take your pick.

unfortunately it seems you have difficulty interpreting the Bible.
"For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things."
This quote has nothing to do with God knowing all it has to do God knowing what's in our hearts even if we don't show it to the outside world. He knows how we feel and what we feel.
God did make a perfect human being but they were all like trees. Didn't move didn't know what to do. Then He decided that they should have emotions but that didn't help either until they were given free will. now man can do whatever he wants unfortunately he used it to sin.
Still God does know what will happen but that doesn't mean we don't have a choice. there are finally two ways your journey ends either in heaven or hell.

As an all powerful and flawless being, "God" would obviously mean exactly what was written, so there could be no mistakes as far as interpretation. When you try to interpret it on your own, you're saying that YOU are god.

Still God does know what will happen but that doesn't mean we don't have a choice.

So, he knows the future, so the future is set, but you have a choice.. Do you even hear yourself?

seems u didn't understand what I said. future is set but it's the path that we choose that seperates us all from one another.

you can hardly understand any of it since it was written with the highest intelligence and it takes faith to understand what was written.

If the future is set, you didn't choose the path, as the path is already chosen. Since you believe that "god" knows this path, and he created you, exactly how do you have free will?

Hell, since you're admitting that he knows the future, you should be able to explain the mistakes he made, despite knowing how they'd turn out, right? In fact, why did he need someone to tell him not to destroy his creations if he knew that they'd tell him to do it, and KNEW that he'd decide not to?

The more you try to defend the Judeo-Christian "god" (even though you're incorrectly representing the bible's position, but I'm happy to respond to your improper interpretation of the bible) the more contradictions you create. You keep trying to make these special case rules to justify the things that are absurd. You're literally trying as hard as you can to convince yourself that you're too inferior to understand the complex workings of the bible, which is why they sound so retarded.

it seems you have limited thinking abilities.
just because you know the outcome it doesn't mean you don't have to act upon anything. you know u'll die in the end? well why bother living u might as well kill yourself what's the point of your existence.
a person such as yourself who has no interest in religion and/or faith is taking a lot of effort to bash it. you're saying that everything that's said in the Bible is incorrect and means nothing why bother arguing about it so hard. if you don't believe in it and you obviously didn't even put effort to actually believe, you're hardly in any position to even comment on it let alone understand it.
you approached this with great skepticism and you didn't even try to make anything of it u just made simple conclusions on how it isn't true because you're mind was set this way from the start.
you wouldn't recognize anything 'abnormal' in your life even if it hit you on the head.

just because you know the outcome it doesn't mean you don't have to act upon anything.

Irrelevant. You said he knows the future, so the future is set - there is no choice. If he didn't know the future, you would have free choice, but he'd be powerless to time itself.

you know u'll die in the end? well why bother living u might as well kill yourself what's the point of your existence.

I might not have much to live for, but I have nothing to die for.

a person such as yourself who has no interest in religion and/or faith is taking a lot of effort to bash it. you're saying that everything that's said in the Bible is incorrect and means nothing why bother arguing about it so hard. if you don't believe in it and you obviously didn't even put effort to actually believe, you're hardly in any position to even comment on it let alone understand it.

I fight against stupidity in all forms - religion just happens to be the biggest.

you approached this with great skepticism and you didn't even try to make anything of it u just made simple conclusions on how it isn't true because you're mind was set this way from the start.
you wouldn't recognize anything 'abnormal' in your life even if it hit you on the head.

No, it's because I've spent so much time looking for answers, so I've already heard (and destroyed) every argument (or lack thereof) that you're poorly regurgitating. The "abnormalities" in your life? Your own creation, and fueled by your willing participation.

"Irrelevant. You said he knows the future, so the future is set - there is no choice. If he didn't know the future, you would have free choice, but he'd be powerless to time itself."

I already addressed this with an argument which you didn't acknowledge for no apparent reason.

"No, it's because I've spent so much time looking for answers, so I've already heard (and destroyed) every argument (or lack thereof) that you're poorly regurgitating. The "abnormalities" in your life? Your own creation, and fueled by your willing participation"

I suggest you keep on looking as all answers you have, have been influenced by God and the Bible. So by your belief and logic all your answers are void.

I already addressed this with an argument which you didn't acknowledge for no apparent reason.

Because it was irrelevant, as stated. Regardless if he (or anyone) acts on it, if he knows what will happen, it is pre-determined. You get the choice of him being powerless to time and humans having free will, or him being all powerful, and humans no longer having free will. Take your pick, but either one destroys the Judeo-Christian "god".

I suggest you keep on looking as all answers you have, have been influenced by God and the Bible. So by your belief and logic all your answers are void.

The bible is a piece of fiction, influenced by everything that came before it. A man is just the sum of his experiences, and the men who imagined up the bible were no different.

nice piece of fiction it is. it has been this planets foundation for more than 2000yrs. I'm yet to see a world based upon Peter Pan.

Organized religion predates Christianity by 3000+ years. It's not even an original piece of fiction.

of course it's some sort of electrochem. reaction. but why does it happen?

There are no reasons why. The "reason" is what you make of it, as reason only exists because you can question it's existence.

people could very well function without it. there's no actual use for it, yet it happens.

Men could function without nipples, and we still have them. Humans are a mess.

that's the main problem of science they can never provide a reason why certain things happen but only how they happen.

That's because there isn't a reason. It happened - end of story.

Also science is very relative and it's all about perception. what seems logical to some doesn't have to be to others.

Logic is a protocol, not perception. If something doesn't seem logical to you, the problem is YOUR perception. This stems from ignorance, lack of education, and general genetic defects.

btw where did I say that universe isn't infinite?

If you can accept that the universe is infinite, then you have no need for a creator. If you require a creator, you must submit to the same logic of "what created the creator?" Again, the problem is you.

it's my opinion that God and the unvierse in eternity are infinite.
there's a lot more to this but i doubt any human could fathom it. well at least not as of yet.

it's my opinion that God and the unvierse in eternity are infinite.

You're not entitled to an opinion on your religion.

more than you think actually but how would you know...

If you are picking and choosing, you already show a lack of faith in religion.

faith is something you either have or don't have regardless of picking and choosing.

Faith is the belief without evidence. You're associating with a religion, but deciding that certain parts don't apply. Ergo, the closest thing you can consider yourself is agnostic. If you're going to try to argue for any organized religion, you either get all of it, or none of it.

so, you came back to debate over god with vedic?

:sadface:

i didn't come here to debate over God as I did post a comment that is in relation to the topic. but it seems there are people who like to make everything abour religion and God.

y get sucked in?

well I guess ignoring then would be the only thing to do which I'm not really a fan of but arguing to no end I ain't either. guess i got stuck.

Wait, you believe in God?

Reading all the comments I was thinking loln1windup 0_o

Yes I believe in God.

50/50 its some troll alias.

I know who it is :)

Ye I looked at his profile afterwards and realised I was at least 50% wrong ;)

"What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof."
-Christopher Hitchens

http://www.wallsofglass.se/wallsofglass.html

I managed about 2 minutes of this.