Why "no kill" and 90% of what P.E.T.A says is bullshit

[NachtSorcier]

Originally Posted by JCC

Who in the flying fuck has ever said that? I don't even mean on this forum, I mean throughout history, has anyone been so dim-witted to openly imply such a thing?

From what I've seen and heard, PETA and those who believe, or claim to believe, in their ideology, think so. You know, the ones who, if they had their way, would do away with pets, gelatin, and Mylar.

Originally Posted by JCC

Human and non-human animal psychology is more similar than you give credit for, but even if it wasn't, what would that prove?

I was merely sharing a belief. It had nothing to do with my point, really. I don't profess to be correct in all things. Take a chill pill.

Originally Posted by JCC

If nature built factory farms then we wouldn't be discussing this, would we?

You don't seem to have an eye for implications. I did say that buying from factory farms is the greater of two evils. You like so many people seem to have a tendency to jump from one extreme to another - if I don't agree with your extreme, I must side with the other. Kind of like how speaking against the far right must mean I'm a far left douchebag, huh?

Originally Posted by JCC

That's stupid. I'll assume that you see murder as wrong; would you see that stance as invalidated if a murderer went against your own belief? Besides which, if we were a superior species because of our ability to choose compassion, why would renouncing that compassion and 'lowering' ourselves to the level of carnivorous non-human animals be a sensible thing to do?

My entire point is that there is a simple right and a simple wrong here: The right is in killing quickly and with as little pain as possible. We are omnivores and nobody can tell us not to eat meat. The wrong is in the factory farms which make animals uncomfortable and kill them cruelly. If somebody thinks that killing animals in any way, shape, or form is wrong, that's their right, but they cannot tell others what they can and can't eat. Do do otherwise is green terrorism, something PETA is famous for, or at least known for directly supporting.

[Delkaetre]

Ahem. On PETA-

http://pennyred.blogspot.com/2009/05....html#comments

Mysogynistic fuckwits, and until they can learn to respect fully half of their own species then I will not respect them or their claims to speak for animals which cannot speak out for themselves.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

*wanders in after eating a hamburger*

Much as I despise West Virginia, one good thing about living here is that there are plenty of farms that haven't been subsidized. Admittedly, we still get some of our meat from Wal-Mart, but you know what? We're poor. We have to do what we have to do. I'd rather not give my money to the devil but we really don't have much of a choice.

You can't afford vegetables? Really? How do you get your folic acid?

On the other hand, we do get some of our beef and eggs from farmers that we know, farmers who don't mistreat their animals or force unnecessary suffering on them.

Quoted for emphasis, since its completely unnecessary to kill these animals at all and eat them, no suffering inflicted on them is necessary.

I'm all for animals being treated as humanely as possible, but to say that they're equal to humans in every way is bullshit. Sure, some animals have venom and stingers and horns and all kinds of cool natural weapons while we have none because we would obliterate our entire existence with them, but that's about as far as it goes. It is my belief that non-human animals are more "pure" than humans only in that they have retained their basic instincts - they know what their job on this earth is and they do it, whereas we have not grown into our supposed higher brains, as it were - the human race as a whole is confused as to what its job is.

Dude, if you think that God or some higher force designs jobs out to animals and we "forgot" what our "job" is supposed to be, keep that to yourself, sentient beings shouldn't have to die because you're an idiot. Animals are not equal in every way, but they are equal in some ways, importantly that just like us they feel pain, sorrow, love and joy, and more importantly, have interest in their self preservation. Because of our similarities, why shouldn't they be respected?

"Equality" is a is a dangerous term to throw around. There are too many degrees of equality to keep track of. Do we all deserve to live without unnecessary suffering? Sure. Is nature obligated to give us lives which are free of suffering? No. There is suffering in the world and there will always be.

Just because you can't get rid of all suffering in the world doesn't mean you can do whatever the fuck you want and inflict as much suffering as you want. Nature isn't obligated but these animals are not at nature's mercy, they are at OUR mercy. There's nothing natural about breeding chickens to have large breasts and lay more eggs than their bodies can bear, or cows and pigs that are obese and can't carry their own weight. Nature has nothing to do with it, WE are obligated to defend those without voices and importantly, those who we have put in those positions in the first place.

If you think carnivorism in any form is wrong, try explaining that to a lion or a shark. If you wish to rebuke that argument by saying, "Well, we as humans are aware of our choices, so we can choose to be herbivores," then you must admit that we are greater than non-humans. Having that awareness is what makes us the greater specie.

So what? We have language and have abstract thinking. Still doesn't mean we should enslave and slaughter animals just because we think they're tasty, gosh darn the moral or environmental consequences.

From what I've seen and heard, PETA and those who believe, or claim to believe, in their ideology, think so. You know, the ones who, if they had their way, would do away with pets, gelatin, and Mylar.

PeTA is a joke, they advertise for KFC, put down eighty percent of all the animals they take in and own stock in Tyson. All real animal rights activists are saying is that animals deserve rights in the ways that they are equal to ourselves. If you really think that rights only belong to those with abstract thinking, what about babies or the mentally handicapped? Are they less human? Can we eat them? Enslave them?

My entire point is that there is a simple right and a simple wrong here: The right is in killing quickly and with as little pain as possible. We are omnivores and nobody can tell us not to eat meat. The wrong is in the factory farms which make animals uncomfortable and kill them cruelly. If somebody thinks that killing animals in any way, shape, or form is wrong, that's their right, but they cannot tell others what they can and can't eat. Do do otherwise is green terrorism, something PETA is famous for, or at least known for directly supporting.

Why? We don't need meat at all, it is an environmental disaster and we're killing our colons and hearts eating so much of it. There is nothing right about it at all. If you think nature or God gave you some right, then why can't we respect those who think that women are God's gift to men, for them to use as they wish? What about God gave us different races so we can enslave them? Some people are mentally impaired or physically weaker than others and wouldn't survive if we were still living out in the wild, why can't we do to them whatever we wish?

If someone knows that killing an animal is wrong, how can you expect them not to say so? If someone thinks slavery is wrong, why respect other's right to own slaves? Its not terrorism to fight for the rights of those who cannot fight themselves, its activism, not terrorism. Cute that you would throw that term around to discredit a side you don't agree with, gosh darn, respecting the freedom of those who can't speak is TERRORISM!

[NachtSorcier]

Originally Posted by Saya

You can't afford vegetables? Really? How do you get your folic acid?

Quoted for emphasis, since its completely unnecessary to kill these animals at all and eat them, no suffering inflicted on them is necessary.

My answer to this is simple: I like meat, therefore I will not stop eating it. I won't bend the the will of eco-terrorists.

As for fruits and vegetables, I do eat them, but much like meat, I'm forced to purchase lesser-quality vegetation. Plants are expensive, too.

Originally Posted by Saya

Dude, if you think that God or some higher force designs jobs out to animals and we "forgot" what our "job" is supposed to be, keep that to yourself, sentient beings shouldn't have to die because you're an idiot. Animals are not equal in every way, but they are equal in some ways, importantly that just like us they feel pain, sorrow, love and joy, and more importantly, have interest in their self preservation. Because of our similarities, why shouldn't they be respected?

I do believe in a Higher Power, but that has little bearing on my earlier statement. I take a common sense approach to nature. Everything in nature has a role - bees pollinate flowers, bacteria break down dead matter, floods fertilize soil, for example - and humans are no exception. My point is that we haven't figured out exactly what it is yet.

At no point did I say that non-humans' sole purpose is to feed humans. Stop jumping to conclusions. I say that to everybody.

Originally Posted by Saya

Just because you can't get rid of all suffering in the world doesn't mean you can do whatever the fuck you want and inflict as much suffering as you want. Nature isn't obligated but these animals are not at nature's mercy, they are at OUR mercy. There's nothing natural about breeding chickens to have large breasts and lay more eggs than their bodies can bear, or cows and pigs that are obese and can't carry their own weight. Nature has nothing to do with it, WE are obligated to defend those without voices and importantly, those who we have put in those positions in the first place.

You just don't get it, do you? At no point did I say that I am in favor of factory farms or breeding animals or injecting them with growth hormones so that they will be bigger and therefore uncomfortable. On the contrary, I am against these practices. I prefer meat that was naturally harvested in a quick death with little pain.

Like it or not, part of the suffering in the world involves the fact that animals feed on other animals. You don't have to take part in that cycle, but don't you dare tell me I can't.

Originally Posted by Saya

So what? We have language and have abstract thinking. Still doesn't mean we should enslave and slaughter animals just because we think they're tasty, gosh darn the moral or environmental consequences.

I suppose birds should stop eating worms, lions should stop eating antelope, and whales should stop eating fish. After all, worms, antelope, and fish have feelings, too. Damn those predators. Get off your high horse and realize that rational thought does not make us apart from nature - we are still part of it.

Originally Posted by Saya

PeTA is a joke, they advertise for KFC, put down eighty percent of all the animals they take in and own stock in Tyson. All real animal rights activists are saying is that animals deserve rights in the ways that they are equal to ourselves. If you really think that rights only belong to those with abstract thinking, what about babies or the mentally handicapped? Are they less human? Can we eat them? Enslave them?

Heh, you really don't get it. I'll say this for the final record: I Am Against PETA And Everything They Stand For.

Humans have a right to get eaten when they stray too close to a lion; a fly has a right to get squished when it touches my food or buzzes in my face one time too many. As such, a cow has a right to get eaten when it ends up on my plate. You do realize, yes, that without a gun, we too are at the mercy of other animals? Again, you're placing the humans above the non-humans - you're essentially saying that humans are greater than non-humans because the latter are poor, defenseless little things.

Originally Posted by Saya

Why? We don't need meat at all, it is an environmental disaster and we're killing our colons and hearts eating so much of it. There is nothing right about it at all. If you think nature or God gave you some right, then why can't we respect those who think that women are God's gift to men, for them to use as they wish? What about God gave us different races so we can enslave them? Some people are mentally impaired or physically weaker than others and wouldn't survive if we were still living out in the wild, why can't we do to them whatever we wish?

I'm not bringing religion into this discussion, you are, and I'd appreciate it if you didn't because it has no place here. I'm not a fanatical Christian or Muslim, so please don't suggest it.

Humans are equipped to eat meat - we have canines and our bodies can digest and absorb it. If we were herbivores, we would regurgitate meat and probably wouldn't find it appetizing in the first place. Again, you have the right to be vegan or vegetarian. Just leave me out of it.

There is quite a difference between giving cattle a comfortable place to live before it is killed quickly and with little pain and forcing a woman into sexual servitude. To suggest that they are the same would probably be very insulting to someone who was sold into slavery. I dare you to look up a former slave and say it to her face.

When meat is clean and free of chemicals and prepared correctly, it is good for you in moderation. You cannot say that all meat is bad because some of it is tainted. Well, you can, but you'd be wrong. Now who sounds like a B.C.E. Jew?

Originally Posted by Saya

If someone knows that killing an animal is wrong, how can you expect them not to say so? If someone thinks slavery is wrong, why respect other's right to own slaves? Its not terrorism to fight for the rights of those who cannot fight themselves, its activism, not terrorism. Cute that you would throw that term around to discredit a side you don't agree with, gosh darn, respecting the freedom of those who can't speak is TERRORISM!

Haha, now I'm certain you don't get it. Green terrorism or eco-terrorism is only applied to those who use violent or otherwise forceful tactics to get their way. When PETA freaks throw blood on people, that is assault. When somebody firebombs a lab that makes use of animal testing, that is fucking terrorism. The head of PETA described a man who took part in such firebombing as a "nice young man."

When someone forces their ideals onto an unwilling recipient, whether with violence or by threatening imprisonment, that is terrorism. I'm assuming if you had your way, it would be illegal to harvest or eat meat. What would become of those who ignored this law? Imprisonment, I'm guessing.

Animal rights activists can protest and picket all they want - Freedoms of Speech and Assembly guarantee that. But when they start physically or mentally FORCING others to adhere to their ideology, that is when they cross the line. I put no lock on anyone's minds or mouths, but I will put a lock on their hands when they begin physically harming other people or restricting their freedom.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

My answer to this is simple: I like meat, therefore I will not stop eating it. I won't bend the the will of eco-terrorists.

As for fruits and vegetables, I do eat them, but much like meat, I'm forced to purchase lesser-quality vegetation. Plants are expensive, too.

But significantly cheaper than meat, and also since the price of meat goes up the cost of plants go up, as most of our crops go to feed livestock.

I do believe in a Higher Power, but that has little bearing on my earlier statement. I take a common sense approach to nature. Everything in nature has a role - bees pollinate flowers, bacteria break down dead matter, floods fertilize soil, for example - and humans are no exception. My point is that we haven't figured out exactly what it is yet.

At no point did I say that non-humans' sole purpose is to feed humans. Stop jumping to conclusions. I say that to everybody.



You just don't get it, do you? At no point did I say that I am in favor of factory farms or breeding animals or injecting them with growth hormones so that they will be bigger and therefore uncomfortable. On the contrary, I am against these practices. I prefer meat that was naturally harvested in a quick death with little pain.

Like it or not, part of the suffering in the world involves the fact that animals feed on other animals. You don't have to take part in that cycle, but don't you dare tell me I can't.



I suppose birds should stop eating worms, lions should stop eating antelope, and whales should stop eating fish. After all, worms, antelope, and fish have feelings, too. Damn those predators. Get off your high horse and realize that rational thought does not make us apart from nature - we are still part of it.

So all you're saying is might makes right? Yeah, you're really making me respect your opinion.

Heh, you really don't get it. I'll say this for the final record: I Am Against PETA And Everything They Stand For.

Humans have a right to get eaten when they stray too close to a lion; a fly has a right to get squished when it touches my food or buzzes in my face one time too many. As such, a cow has a right to get eaten when it ends up on my plate. You do realize, yes, that without a gun, we too are at the mercy of other animals? Again, you're placing the humans above the non-humans - you're essentially saying that humans are greater than non-humans because the latter are poor, defenseless little things.



I'm not bringing religion into this discussion, you are, and I'd appreciate it if you didn't because it has no place here. I'm not a fanatical Christian or Muslim, so please don't suggest it.

A cow doesn't have the "right" to be born into a world that cannot sustain it, to be raised to give birth to babies that are torn away from it to go be fattened up, and then be sent to die when she cannot give birth anymore. A cow or pig doesn't want to be torn away from its mother and spend the few months of its life being fattened up for slaughter, a chicken doesn't want to give away the hundreds of eggs it lays only to be slaughtered when it no longer can lay anymore. Its not a "right", its YOUR will that you're imposing on these animals, its a "right" that they do not want. I think they'd rather live their lives with their families and not be slaughtered just because you like to clog your arteries with hamburgers.

Humans are equipped to eat meat - we have canines and our bodies can digest and absorb it. If we were herbivores, we would regurgitate meat and probably wouldn't find it appetizing in the first place. Again, you have the right to be vegan or vegetarian. Just leave me out of it.

Our canines are those of a frugivore, our ancestors were frugivorous and evolved to eat meat eventually as vegetation became scarce. Our intestines are also too long to compare to those of a carnivore which is why meat rots in our colon and can cause colon cancer. We have evolved to tolerate it and utilize it but it still doesn't mean we have to eat it. And since you're choices is killing animals and the environment, no you cannot be left out of it, you're already apart of it.

There is quite a difference between giving cattle a comfortable place to live before it is killed quickly and with little pain and forcing a woman into sexual servitude. To suggest that they are the same would probably be very insulting to someone who was sold into slavery. I dare you to look up a former slave and say it to her face.

There's little between making cows mate, taking their children, stuffing them into "comfortable" barns, fattening them up until they cannot support their weight and then slitting their throats when it doesn't want to and forcing your will on other beings. Both are situations where a person in power imposes his will on those who cannot fight back.

When meat is clean and free of chemicals and prepared correctly, it is good for you in moderation. You cannot say that all meat is bad because some of it is tainted. Well, you can, but you'd be wrong. Now who sounds like a B.C.E. Jew?

Since shit spills out into the meat during butchering, chemicals would be the last thing I'd be worried about. You know meat contributes more to global warming than transportation as well, right? Not to mention all the animal shit that gets put out in into the waterways because farms can't handle that much shit.

When someone forces their ideals onto an unwilling recipient, whether with violence or by threatening imprisonment, that is terrorism. I'm assuming if you had your way, it would be illegal to harvest or eat meat. What would become of those who ignored this law? Imprisonment, I'm guessing.

Well according to your first sentence, it would equal terrorism.

Animal rights activists can protest and picket all they want - Freedoms of Speech and Assembly guarantee that. But when they start physically or mentally FORCING others to adhere to their ideology, that is when they cross the line. I put no lock on anyone's minds or mouths, but I will put a lock on their hands when they begin physically harming other people or restricting their freedom.

They never ever kill or harm people, I don't know where you got that idea from. While I don't agree with PeTA splashing blood on people the ALF busting animals out of labs is another thing, but go to the ALF thread if you want to discuss that and has little to do with whether animals deserve rights or not.

[NachtSorcier]

Originally Posted by Saya

But significantly cheaper than meat, and also since the price of meat goes up the cost of plants go up, as most of our crops go to feed livestock.

It's about the same where I shop, actually. Fruits and vegetables would cost even more if I shopped at a farmer's market.

Originally Posted by Saya

So all you're saying is might makes right? Yeah, you're really making me respect your opinion.

I have no idea where you got that from. I suspect you simply couldn't think of a rebuttal.

Originally Posted by Saya

A cow doesn't have the "right" to be born into a world that cannot sustain it, to be raised to give birth to babies that are torn away from it to go be fattened up, and then be sent to die when she cannot give birth anymore. A cow or pig doesn't want to be torn away from its mother and spend the few months of its life being fattened up for slaughter, a chicken doesn't want to give away the hundreds of eggs it lays only to be slaughtered when it no longer can lay anymore. Its not a "right", its YOUR will that you're imposing on these animals, its a "right" that they do not want. I think they'd rather live their lives with their families and not be slaughtered just because you like to clog your arteries with hamburgers.

You're assuming that non-humans share our ideology. After they're done feeding from their mothers, calves don't even remember their mothers, nor do the mothers remember their calves. They don't share the same emotional investment in family that we do.

Originally Posted by Saya

Our canines are those of a frugivore, our ancestors were frugivorous and evolved to eat meat eventually as vegetation became scarce. Our intestines are also too long to compare to those of a carnivore which is why meat rots in our colon and can cause colon cancer. We have evolved to tolerate it and utilize it but it still doesn't mean we have to eat it. And since you're choices is killing animals and the environment, no you cannot be left out of it, you're already apart of it.

You see only what you want to see. When I say "leave me out of it," I mean don't tell me what to do. If you want to see changes, get away from the computer and do something about it instead of whining like a little bitch. Or are you too weak from lack of protein to stand up?

Originally Posted by Saya

There's little between making cows mate, taking their children, stuffing them into "comfortable" barns, fattening them up until they cannot support their weight and then slitting their throats when it doesn't want to and forcing your will on other beings. Both are situations where a person in power imposes his will on those who cannot fight back.

You're speaking as though I support factory farms and cruelty. I don't. I'll say it again: Farms that have not been subsidized do not "fatten them up until they cannot support their weight and then slit their throats." You are speaking of government subsidizing. Speak out against the feds and leave the local farmers who know what they're doing alone. I can tell you from first-hand knowledge that local farmers allow their calves to grow up feeding from their mothers, and when they grow up, they eat only what they want and then wander freely on the pasture until it's time for bed, which by the way is a very wide stall filled with straw or sawdust.

Originally Posted by Saya

Since shit spills out into the meat during butchering, chemicals would be the last thing I'd be worried about. You know meat contributes more to global warming than transportation as well, right? Not to mention all the animal shit that gets put out in into the waterways because farms can't handle that much shit.

Manure is used as fertilizer. Farms need a lot of fertilizer. Remember, we are speaking of local farms, not factory farms, because I don't support factory farms. On local farms, the main way in which feces and urine make their way into water is when the cattle wander into creeks to cool themselves off, which is something they would do if they wandered free.

I will not debate on the matter of global warming. You asked me not to go off-topic and I'll ask you the same.

Originally Posted by Saya

Well according to your first sentence, it would equal terrorism.

Are picketing and protesting terrorism? No. They're pretty pointless and don't really do anything, but they're not terrorism.

Originally Posted by Saya

They never ever kill or harm people, I don't know where you got that idea from. While I don't agree with PeTA splashing blood on people the ALF busting animals out of labs is another thing, but go to the ALF thread if you want to discuss that and has little to do with whether animals deserve rights or not.

I never said that they have physically harmed anyone, I'm saying that those who have firebombed labs have been commended by PETA, which in my eyes is almost as bad. Not as, but almost.

Do I consider using the law to force people into veganism terrorism? Maybe not, but I do consider it imperialism. I'm just thankful that there are enough omnivores in the government to keep that from happening.

Throwing blood on people is assault, and therefore wrong. The only thing I will say about ALF is that they are criminals.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

It's about the same where I shop, actually. Fruits and vegetables would cost even more if I shopped at a farmer's market.

The price of veggies went up when the price of meat went up, its very related. Farmer's markets are generally overpriced anyway.

I have no idea where you got that from. I suspect you simply couldn't think of a rebuttal.

To say that I didn't have a rebuttal would imply that you had at all an argument.

You're assuming that non-humans share our ideology. After they're done feeding from their mothers, calves don't even remember their mothers, nor do the mothers remember their calves. They don't share the same emotional investment in family that we do.

They do, female cows would spend all their natural lives with a matriarch cow as would most of the males. I assume you've heard of this thing called a "herd". A "herd" is an animal family unit, stop me if this gets too complicated for you, a matriarch in particular is very emotionally invested in her herd, as well as in farms it is known it is detrimental to the health of cows to mix them up every so often because they miss their family and friends, and get sick from separation anxiety. In pigs its the same, a matriarchal system, in chickens a rooster will live in a harem with a flock of hens, and will defend them to the death. They are just emotionally invested in families as we are.

You see only what you want to see. When I say "leave me out of it," I mean don't tell me what to do. If you want to see changes, get away from the computer and do something about it instead of whining like a little bitch. Or are you too weak from lack of protein to stand up?

I did do something about it, I refused to take part in this horrible system and stopped eating animal products, and continue to promote veganism wherever I can. And protein deficiency is extremely rare, I wouldn't have guessed you were THAT ignorant, since even vegans get too much protein.

You're speaking as though I support factory farms and cruelty. I don't. I'll say it again: Farms that have not been subsidized do not "fatten them up until they cannot support their weight and then slit their throats." You are speaking of government subsidizing. Speak out against the feds and leave the local farmers who know what they're doing alone. I can tell you from first-hand knowledge that local farmers allow their calves to grow up feeding from their mothers, and when they grow up, they eat only what they want and then wander freely on the pasture until it's time for bed, which by the way is a very wide stall filled with straw or sawdust.

Yeah, I bet they're totally okay with their lives summing up to the value of your hamburger just because they got to walk around a bit and sleep in hay before their lives were ended.

Manure is used as fertilizer. Farms need a lot of fertilizer. Remember, we are speaking of local farms, not factory farms, because I don't support factory farms. On local farms, the main way in which feces and urine make their way into water is when the cattle wander into creeks to cool themselves off, which is something they would do if they wandered free.

Chemical fertilizers and bloodmeal are more popular, and since over 50 billion animals are slaughtered in the world each year, 10 billion in the States, and since a single dairy cow shits 120 pounds every day, well, all those animals for all their lives, thats a lot of shit. Hog farms in particular are notorious for the lagoons of shit that form because of this, and despite your ideal "small farm", its not the size of the farms individually, there's simply not enough demand for shit fertilizers to use it all. It still gets into the water.

I will not debate on the matter of global warming. You asked me not to go off-topic and I'll ask you the same.

The rainforests are being chopped down to grow feed for the increasing number of livestock and the UN is urging everyone to go vegetarian, its pretty relevant and on topic.

Are picketing and protesting terrorism? No. They're pretty pointless and don't really do anything, but they're not terrorism.

The sentence you said was:

When someone forces their ideals onto an unwilling recipient, whether with violence or by threatening imprisonment, that is terrorism. I'm assuming if you had your way, it would be illegal to harvest or eat meat. What would become of those who ignored this law? Imprisonment, I'm guessing.

You force your ideals on unwilling animals, by violence and imprisonment, and by your own admission is terrorism, so if it were illegal you would agree that those who raise and kill animals would be terrorists.

I never said that they have physically harmed anyone, I'm saying that those who have firebombed labs have been commended by PETA, which in my eyes is almost as bad. Not as, but almost.

Do I consider using the law to force people into veganism terrorism? Maybe not, but I do consider it imperialism. I'm just thankful that there are enough omnivores in the government to keep that from happening.

Throwing blood on people is assault, and therefore wrong. The only thing I will say about ALF is that they are criminals.

You brought it up, and since you force animals into slavery and death how is that not imperialism? Because they can't talk? Or because you think they aren't as emotionally invested in family values as humans are? What makes an animal so lowly as to deserve death just because they are tasty?

[NachtSorcier]

Originally Posted by Saya

The price of veggies went up when the price of meat went up, its very related. Farmer's markets are generally overpriced anyway.

So? That's a matter of pricing, not whether or not we should eat meat.

Originally Posted by Saya

To say that I didn't have a rebuttal would imply that you had at all an argument.

I do have an argument, you're just too shortsighted and too into your own words to see it.

Originally Posted by Saya

They do, female cows would spend all their natural lives with a matriarch cow as would most of the males. I assume you've heard of this thing called a "herd". A "herd" is an animal family unit, stop me if this gets too complicated for you, a matriarch in particular is very emotionally invested in her herd, as well as in farms it is known it is detrimental to the health of cows to mix them up every so often because they miss their family and friends, and get sick from separation anxiety. In pigs its the same, a matriarchal system, in chickens a rooster will live in a harem with a flock of hens, and will defend them to the death. They are just emotionally invested in families as we are.

Yeah, they defend their females so they can keep fucking them or fertilizing their eggs. Non-humans don't understand romance, they understand the desire to breed. Kudos to them, and I mean that.

Originally Posted by Saya

I did do something about it, I refused to take part in this horrible system and stopped eating animal products, and continue to promote veganism wherever I can. And protein deficiency is extremely rare, I wouldn't have guessed you were THAT ignorant, since even vegans get too much protein.

I'm not that ignorant, but apparently you are unable to pick up on sarcasm. And by the way, simply refusing to take part doesn't really do anything. Eat what you want and let others eat what they want. Taking the self-righteousness down a notch wouldn't hurt either.

Originally Posted by Saya

Yeah, I bet they're totally okay with their lives summing up to the value of your hamburger just because they got to walk around a bit and sleep in hay before their lives were ended.

You would rather they walked around on their own and suffered a more painful death being attacked by wolves and bears and cougars and being hit by cars? Where would you have them sleep? In a meadow where they'll be attacked by predators?

Originally Posted by Saya

Chemical fertilizers and bloodmeal are more popular, and since over 50 billion animals are slaughtered in the world each year, 10 billion in the States, and since a single dairy cow shits 120 pounds every day, well, all those animals for all their lives, thats a lot of shit. Hog farms in particular are notorious for the lagoons of shit that form because of this, and despite your ideal "small farm", its not the size of the farms individually, there's simply not enough demand for shit fertilizers to use it all. It still gets into the water.

I'm still defending local farms and condemning factory farms. I'm not your enemy, the feds are. Have you ever been on a farm or are you just looking at videos of slaughterhouses and taking that for absolute truth? I have been on farms and I know what I'm talking about.

Originally Posted by Saya

The rainforests are being chopped down to grow feed for the increasing number of livestock and the UN is urging everyone to go vegetarian, its pretty relevant and on topic.

Rainforest, Schmainforest. The UN is nothing more than a group of rich people who r ape Africans and bomb Israelis. Nobody knows what exactly their purpose is.

Originally Posted by Saya

You force your ideals on unwilling animals, by violence and imprisonment, and by your own admission is terrorism, so if it were illegal you would agree that those who raise and kill animals would be terrorists.

My ideals are nature's ideals. Life feeds on life. Deal with it.

Originally Posted by Saya

You brought it up, and since you force animals into slavery and death how is that not imperialism? Because they can't talk? Or because you think they aren't as emotionally invested in family values as humans are? What makes an animal so lowly as to deserve death just because they are tasty?

Nothing, nor does being tasty to a predator make either humans or non-humans lowly enough to be eaten by them. It is simply the cycle of life, which feeds on other life.

I don't consider giving animals a safe home and food and water (speaking again in terms of local farms) and a quick death which they aren't even aware of (which is much more preferable to a death at the hands of a wolf or the eighteen wheels of a big rig) to be slavery.

All that said, I'm done here. I've had great fun laughing at your shortsighted desire to control others, but I'm tired now. You have a great night.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

I do have an argument, you're just too shortsighted and too into your own words to see it.

All your argument amounts to is "I can so I will, might makes right."

Yeah, they defend their females so they can keep fucking them or fertilizing their eggs. Non-humans don't understand romance, they understand the desire to breed. Kudos to them, and I mean that.

They understand romance and love, if you weren't fortunate at all to have a pet that loved you, here you go.:
http://peacefulprairie.blogspot.com/.../pig-love.html

And how is giving his life for his flock an act for sex if he can't have sex since he's dead? o.O

I'm not that ignorant, but apparently you are unable to pick up on sarcasm. And by the way, simply refusing to take part doesn't really do anything. Eat what you want and let others eat what they want. Taking the self-righteousness down a notch wouldn't hurt either.

If that was sarcasm, not funny at all and just again displays your ignorance. Doing what I can to lower the demand and therefore supply does make a small difference, but I think if I were to get into detail about my other activism work you'd just pick it apart anyway.

You would rather they walked around on their own and suffered a more painful death being attacked by wolves and bears and cougars and being hit by cars? Where would you have them sleep? In a meadow where they'll be attacked by predators?



I'm still defending local farms and condemning factory farms. I'm not your enemy, the feds are. Have you ever been on a farm or are you just looking at videos of slaughterhouses and taking that for absolute truth? I have been on farms and I know what I'm talking about.

I've been on farms, and i know what I'm talking about. They only value animals as a produce and commodity, and do not respect their lives. And no, I'd rather not them wander around, I would rather we didn't breed billions of animals into existence just so we could eat them, and I would rather we neuter and retire them to farm sanctuaries, such as Farm Sanctuary and Peaceful Prairie.

Rainforest, Schmainforest. The UN is nothing more than a group of rich people who r ape Africans and bomb Israelis. Nobody knows what exactly their purpose is.



My ideals are nature's ideals. Life feeds on life. Deal with it.

Grr, me hungry, me eat meat just because I want to, I dunno what UN is, screw rainforest, not like they make air for us to breath, ugh. Me close to nature, me so smart me know what "nature" is, not the earth as a whole but a god and me listen to nature, nature tell me to enslave animals and eat them, grr.

Nothing, nor does being tasty to a predator make either humans or non-humans lowly enough to be eaten by them. It is simply the cycle of life, which feeds on other life.

I don't consider giving animals a safe home and food and water (speaking again in terms of local farms) and a quick death which they aren't even aware of (which is much more preferable to a death at the hands of a wolf or the eighteen wheels of a big rig) to be slavery.

All that said, I'm done here. I've had great fun laughing at your shortsighted desire to control others, but I'm tired now. You have a great night.

Its also natural for a man to fuck a woman, doesn't make **** okay. You're not giving animals a home, you're forcing them to be born into these "homes", you're not doing them a favour by taking them in, you're sneaking up on dairy cows and inseminating them and making beef cows fuck so you can eat their babies. Their population is so out of control because we made them.

Thank you for reinforcing my belief that meat makes people stupid, toodles.

[Joker_in_the_Pack]

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

I put no lock on anyone's minds or mouths, but I will put a lock on their hands when they begin physically harming other people or restricting their freedom.

I'm not aware of animal rights activists harming humans. Even ALF, the most extreme animal rights group, refuses point blank to kill actual people. They'll blow the shit out of things though.

Also, you're against restricting peoples right to eat meat, but you don't care about the right of the animal to live?




As an aside, Lord Tutti Frutti, I missed you! I'm glad to see you back on Gnet.

[JCC]

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

Humans are equipped to eat meat - we have canines

Like every other mammal, such as herbivorous gorillas with canines that are inches long? Our teeth are a brilliant indicator that we shouldn't be eating meat; we can't chew it. Virtually all choking deaths are from unchewed meat. If you think that our teeth prove how we should be eating meat, go bite through a pig like the predator you think you are.

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

our bodies can digest and absorb it. If we were herbivores, we would regurgitate meat and probably wouldn't find it appetizing in the first place.

You mean things like food poisoning, which is mainly caused by uncooked meat?

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

When someone forces their ideals onto an unwilling recipient, whether with violence or by threatening imprisonment, that is terrorism.

Which would make livestock farming and animal experimentation terrorism too, surely, since the notion that these things are acceptable is merely an ideal.

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

You're assuming that non-humans share our ideology. After they're done feeding from their mothers, calves don't even remember their mothers, nor do the mothers remember their calves. They don't share the same emotional investment in family that we do.

There are plenty of resources on the negative psychological effects of cows being taken from their mothers, both for calf and mother, if you can be bothered to look. Your statement simply isn't true.

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

Do I consider using the law to force people into veganism terrorism? Maybe not, but I do consider it imperialism.

Why would you consider it imperialism? Is it, perhaps, because you don't understand the concept of imperialism, since a repressive law has nothing to do with empires?

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

You would rather they walked around on their own and suffered a more painful death being attacked by wolves and bears and cougars and being hit by cars? Where would you have them sleep? In a meadow where they'll be attacked by predators?

American slaveowners made the same argument in defense of slavery, claiming that Africa was a nation of barbarians and that the oppression and slavery of African people enriched them greatly, since they avoided the terrible fate of having to live in such a terribly barbaric place. Unfortunately, the argument doesn't hold much water, as the lifespan of farm animals, for example broiler chickens, is much shorter than the average lifespan of wild animals, and they can use that lifespan for their own means rather than for external interests.

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

My ideals are nature's ideals.

Then why aren't you a herbivore? Ignorance? More importantly, why would you turn a blind eye to deforestation?

[NachtSorcier]

Originally Posted by JCC

Like every other mammal, such as herbivorous gorillas with canines that are inches long? Our teeth are a brilliant indicator that we shouldn't be eating meat; we can't chew it. Virtually all choking deaths are from unchewed meat. If you think that our teeth prove how we should be eating meat, go bite through a pig like the predator you think you are.

I didn't say that it was the indicator, it is an indicator.

Originally Posted by JCC

You mean things like food poisoning, which is mainly caused by uncooked meat?

So, according to this statement and the earlier one about choking, because there are people out there stupid enough to not chew their food or cook it thoroughly, I shouldn't have my choice of food? I suppose you were probably talking about children in regard to choking...well, kids choke. It happens. I almost choked on an orange when I was five. Should we ban oranges?

Maybe instead of worrying about meat you should be worrying about the morons who still think gasoline is a good way to kill head lice and set their kids' heads on fire. Then again, lice are living things and they have feelings, so we should probably all walk around infested with insects and vermin.

Originally Posted by JCC

Which would make livestock farming and animal experimentation terrorism too, surely, since the notion that these things are acceptable is merely an ideal.

Heh, you're assuming that I consider humans and non-humans to be exactly equal. I don't. If you put a human in a stall and tell him or her you're going to slaughter them, they know what that means. A cow doesn't know that. It's not like they spend their entire lives shitting their pants wondering if they're going to die tomorrow. I have enough respect for animals to know that they don't have all of the same hangups that we do.

Originally Posted by JCC

There are plenty of resources on the negative psychological effects of cows being taken from their mothers, both for calf and mother, if you can be bothered to look. Your statement simply isn't true.

Okay, I can admit when I'm wrong, but it still stands that the local farms which I support allow calves to grow up with their mothers. For the last time: I Don't Support Factory Farms.

Originally Posted by JCC

Why would you consider it imperialism? Is it, perhaps, because you don't understand the concept of imperialism, since a repressive law has nothing to do with empires?

Maybe imperialism wasn't the right word. However, whether or not local farms can continue to harvest meat is a state issue, not a federal one. Therefore, the residents of each individual state would have to vote on whether or not their local farms could continue to do so. To engage in collective farming would be a socialist or communist practice, thus revealing the American government as a collective hypocrite.

Originally Posted by JCC

American slaveowners made the same argument in defense of slavery, claiming that Africa was a nation of barbarians and that the oppression and slavery of African people enriched them greatly, since they avoided the terrible fate of having to live in such a terribly barbaric place. Unfortunately, the argument doesn't hold much water, as the lifespan of farm animals, for example broiler chickens, is much shorter than the average lifespan of wild animals, and they can use that lifespan for their own means rather than for external interests.

That's stupid. Tribal peoples knew how to defend themselves, as we know. If they came across a lion or an unfriendly native they would be able to defend themselves with weapons. A cow doesn't have any kind of defense against a cougar.

Originally Posted by JCC

Then why aren't you a herbivore? Ignorance? More importantly, why would you turn a blind eye to deforestation?

Whether humans are herbivores or omnivores is immaterial to the bigger issue here, and as I said, I can admit when I'm wrong, and maybe I am, but my concern is this: The government cannot (at least not by the original standards of the Constitution) force people to make healthy choices for themselves, unless you're interested in totalitarianism.

I think it's pretty clear that lean meat is good for you in moderation and that red meat is a good source of iron, again in moderation, but supposing it is the most deadly of foods, so what? When people know that something is bad for them they tend not to care, and that is their right. Drinking is bad for you but the majority of people have a few drinks from time to time. Moderation is key.

That's all I have to say to you. You're not going to make me become a vegetarian, so there's no point in arguing. Thank you for bringing some new ideas to my attention.

[Godslayer Jillian]

I didn't read all, but I really doubt JCC was trying to make you vegetarian.
However, if he's arguing with you it's because you came in and began to try to rationalize your meat diet. Clearly, as you've been reduced to saying that the only reason you eat it is because you like it despite the fact that it's unhealthy, unnecessary, and unnatural, then his goal has been achieved.

[NachtSorcier]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

I didn't read all, but I really doubt JCC was trying to make you vegetarian.
However, if he's arguing with you it's because you came in and began to try to rationalize your meat diet. Clearly, as you've been reduced to saying that the only reason you eat it is because you like it despite the fact that it's unhealthy, unnecessary, and unnatural, then his goal has been achieved.

Actually, no. The main issue is government control - I don't like being told what I can and can't eat. But whether it's completely unhealthy is a matter of debate. As I've said, there are lean white meats that are good for you and red meat is a source of iron when both are eaten in moderation. Does nobody know what moderation and proper preparation mean?

My meat diet? Do you assume that because I partake of meat that's all I eat? Not that it's any of your business, but I eat meat once a day at dinner, and even then it's a small portion, usually chicken or turkey. For breakfast and lunch I eat cereal, bread, fruit, and salads. Believe it or not, I've lost 70 pounds in the past year, and lean meat was part of my diet. *gasp*

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

Actually, no. The main issue is government control - I don't like being told what I can and can't eat.

Where the fuck do you speak about that in your first post?

But whether it's completely unhealthy is a matter of debate. As I've said, there are lean white meats that are good for you and red meat is a source of iron when both are eaten in moderation. Does nobody know what moderation and proper preparation mean?

Wine is also good for you in moderation. It still doesn't take away from the fact that alcohol intake is not good for you. All those benefits you mentioneda are more accessible in the vegetable world, therefore this is not an argument at all.
You're seeing the good in the bad, which is alright, but it's not a justification for eating meat anymore than productivity is a justification for slavery (in a much lesser magnitude of course but with exactly the same logic)

My meat diet? Do you assume that because I partake of meat that's all I eat?

You have meat, therefore meat diet. Do you assume that because I differ your diet fro ma vegan one I assume you only eat bloody raw meat every day? you're the one making assumptions, not me.

[Pineapple_Juice]

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

My answer to this is simple: I like meat, therefore I will not stop eating it.

You need not speak another word.
I have been in many many arguments and debates over veganism and the killing of animals for our consumption, and every argument boils down to exactly this-a substanceless, intellectually void sentence that can be summed up as "it tastes good."
How fucking juvenile.


Furthermore, stop watching so much 24. "...bending to the will of eco-terrorism", fuck off.

[Godslayer Jillian]

For the record I still eat meat, and it's precisely because of that. It tastes good.
But at least I acknowledge the stupidity and hedonism of it.
The first step to any problem is accepting one has a problem, remember?
No fucking rationalizations from me.

[NachtSorcier]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Where the fuck do you speak about that in your first post?

Why the fuck does it matter at what point in time I said it? You're arguing over nothing. Much like many of the people here, indeed everywhere, you seem to enjoy the sound of your own voice.

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Wine is also good for you in moderation. It still doesn't take away from the fact that alcohol intake is not good for you. All those benefits you mentioneda are more accessible in the vegetable world, therefore this is not an argument at all.

You seem to be missing the point of moderation. Everything, whether it's mean, alcohol, or vegetables, is unhealthy in excess. Sure, alcohol or meat might kill you if you partake of large quantities daily, but they're not going to hurt you if you eat or drink a little bit here and there.

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

You're seeing the good in the bad, which is alright, but it's not a justification for eating meat anymore than productivity is a justification for slavery (in a much lesser magnitude of course but with exactly the same logic)

You people keep bringing up slavery like it has something to do with eating meat. I highly doubt anybody who has been a slave would agree that their experiences are in any way related to meat harvests.

How's this for justification: Keep your hands off of my plate, asshole.

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

You have meat, therefore meat diet. Do you assume that because I differ your diet fro ma vegan one I assume you only eat bloody raw meat every day? you're the one making assumptions, not me.

Um, no. If I were making an assumption I would not have put it in the form of a question. Rather than "Do you assume?" I would have said, "You are assuming."

I see what good exists in bad, which I think is a little more productive than seeing all the bad that exists in good, which is what you seem to be doing, although I could be wrong.

I've said all I can say to you, and now we're done. Good day to you, sir.

[NachtSorcier]

I don't watch television.

I don't rationalize anything. I know killing is a messy business. I would never call something what it isn't, namely, I would not call killing not-killing. I know what it is, I just know where I stand.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Then why did you have to invent such stupid rationalizations, because they were rationalizations, such as that we have canines to eat meat?

That's precisely the definition of a rationalization, as plant eaters also have canines, which means your argument had little to no actual value but you still used it to justify yourself.

Thanks for calling me an asshole for actually being sensible.

[JCC]

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

I didn't say that it was the indicator, it is an indicator.

It's not an indicator if every mammal has canines! It's like saying "I have feet, therefore, I am an omnivore".

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

So, according to this statement and the earlier one about choking, because there are people out there stupid enough to not chew their food or cook it thoroughly, I shouldn't have my choice of food? I suppose you were probably talking about children in regard to choking...well, kids choke. It happens. I almost choked on an orange when I was five. Should we ban oranges?

No, you kept saying that you live by nature's laws and that we're supposed to eat meat. My point is that regardless of whether you like meat or not, it has to be conceded that most evidence points towards meat not being a natural part of the human diet.

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

Maybe instead of worrying about meat you should be worrying about the morons who still think gasoline is a good way to kill head lice and set their kids' heads on fire. Then again, lice are living things and they have feelings, so we should probably all walk around infested with insects and vermin.

Why would I care about an isolated incident of stupidity more than a trade that kills billions each year?

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

Heh, you're assuming that I consider humans and non-humans to be exactly equal. I don't. If you put a human in a stall and tell him or her you're going to slaughter them, they know what that means. A cow doesn't know that. It's not like they spend their entire lives shitting their pants wondering if they're going to die tomorrow. I have enough respect for animals to know that they don't have all of the same hangups that we do.

So what? You could kill a person without them expecting it and it's not morally justifiable, that entire statement is pointless.

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

Okay, I can admit when I'm wrong, but it still stands that the local farms which I support allow calves to grow up with their mothers. For the last time: I Don't Support Factory Farms.

Yeah, I got that part.

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

Maybe imperialism wasn't the right word. However, whether or not local farms can continue to harvest meat is a state issue, not a federal one. Therefore, the residents of each individual state would have to vote on whether or not their local farms could continue to do so. To engage in collective farming would be a socialist or communist practice, thus revealing the American government as a collective hypocrite.

This has absolutely nothing to do with politics, it's a moral and ethical issue.

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

That's stupid. Tribal peoples knew how to defend themselves, as we know. If they came across a lion or an unfriendly native they would be able to defend themselves with weapons. A cow doesn't have any kind of defense against a cougar.

What? That's not even remotely relevant to what I said.

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

Whether humans are herbivores or omnivores is immaterial to the bigger issue here,

What happened to living by nature's laws? Now nature's laws are immaterial and there's a much bigger issue?

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

and as I said, I can admit when I'm wrong, and maybe I am, but my concern is this: The government cannot (at least not by the original standards of the Constitution) force people to make healthy choices for themselves, unless you're interested in totalitarianism.

I wouldn't imply that they should.

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

You people keep bringing up slavery like it has something to do with eating meat. I highly doubt anybody who has been a slave would agree that their experiences are in any way related to meat harvests.

You would be wrong, then. Slavery, black rights, feminism etc. have all crossed over into animal rights multiple times. One of the founders of the RSPCA, which was originally a radical group aiming to seriously reform farming rather than being the shitty big rescue centre that they are now, was William Wilberforce, for example.

[NachtSorcier]

Originally Posted by JCC

It's not an indicator if every mammal has canines! It's like saying "I have feet, therefore, I am an omnivore".

Not all of them do. If I remember correctly, cows are an example of herbivores which have only flat teeth. More to the point, chimpanzees, which are our closest relative genetically speaking, are meat-eaters despite not having any weapons other than agility and muscular strength.

Originally Posted by JCC

No, you kept saying that you live by nature's laws and that we're supposed to eat meat. My point is that regardless of whether you like meat or not, it has to be conceded that most evidence points towards meat not being a natural part of the human diet.

I didn't say that anyone is supposed to eat meat, I said that we are equipped to eat meat. Therefore, anyone who chooses to eat meat can and anyone who chooses not to has that option. It is the way of nature for life to feed on life - plants feed on decayed remains, animals feed off plants and each other, but I will not besmirch anyone their personal choices.

Originally Posted by JCC

Why would I care about an isolated incident of stupidity more than a trade that kills billions each year?

Perhaps not the incidents themselves, but if you want to say that cows and pigs are creatures with feelings who deserve to live, then you must admit that rats and roaches and ticks are, too.

Originally Posted by JCC

This has absolutely nothing to do with politics, it's a moral and ethical issue.

Morals and ethics are relative. It has everything to do with politics.

Originally Posted by JCC

What? That's not even remotely relevant to what I said.

How is it not?

Originally Posted by JCC

What happened to living by nature's laws? Now nature's laws are immaterial and there's a much bigger issue?

See above.

Originally Posted by JCC

I wouldn't imply that they should.

What then is your plan for getting everybody to stop eating meat? If you shut down all farms you'll put thousands of farmers into poverty; regardless of the method you will be denying millions their choice of food. Either way, it goes against what America's standards are supposed to be.

Originally Posted by JCC

You would be wrong, then. Slavery, black rights, feminism etc. have all crossed over into animal rights multiple times. One of the founders of the RSPCA, which was originally a radical group aiming to seriously reform farming rather than being the shitty big rescue centre that they are now, was William Wilberforce, for example.

Special interest groups are using unrelated issues to gain sympathy? Gee, I've never heard of that tactic before.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Man. See, another rationalization.
Chimps are meat eaters now?
No they aren't.
They eat plants. Almost all their diet is what we would consider vegan.
They only eat meat if scarcity brings that necessity.
If you want to compare ourselves to our closest relatives, which I believe is a perfectly good reasoning, then you can only possibly reach the conclusion that we ought to be fully vegan except under periods of scarcity.
But you don't. Because you look for instances in nature that rationalize your diet, rather than try to reason what your diet should be according to nature.

[NachtSorcier]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Man. See, another rationalization.
Chimps are meat eaters now?
No they aren't.
They eat plants. Almost all their diet is what we would consider vegan.
They only eat meat if scarcity brings that necessity.
If you want to compare ourselves to our closest relatives, which I believe is a perfectly good reasoning, then you can only possibly reach the conclusion that we ought to be fully vegan except under periods of scarcity.
But you don't. Because you look for instances in nature that rationalize your diet, rather than try to reason what your diet should be according to nature.

Originally Posted by honoluluzoo.org

Chimpanzee diets are composed mainly of ripe fruits but vary according to the time of the year and abundance of specific food items. They will spend many hours a day eating about 20 different species of plants and up to about 300 different species during a one year period. They do not store food and will eat it at the place they find it. They also enjoy eating young leaves particularly in the afternoon. In long dry seasons when fruit is scarce, tree seeds, flowers, soft pith, galls, resin and bark become an important part of their diet.

They also eat many different types of insects, however termites are the most nutritionally important. Termites are collected either by hand or with tools which are modified by the chimp and specifically used for this purpose. Many zoos, including the Honolulu Zoo, have built termite mounds to simulate this natural behavior of feeding. See our termite mound enrichment Females spend twice as much time eating insects as males do. Birds are occasionally eaten. Mammals such as monkeys, pigs and antelope are also eaten, particularly by males, but along with termites only account for about 5% of their diet.

Yes, 5%, which is about the same as standard nutritional guidelines recommended for humans. It all goes back to moderation - ideally, meat should be eaten in small portions.

[Godslayer Jillian]

You are talking about bugs, and in fact, my opinion IS that an insect diet would give us an impressive amount of protein.
Growing vegetables, putting earthworms to enrich the soil, eating the vegetables and grounding the earthworms, composting the leftovers to further enrich the soil...

So what you just said doesn't help justify your position at all unless you really have an insect diet.