SMBC Comics Forum

Jesus taught us that an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind. just because the plants have no respect for this brief mortal coil doesn't mean we have to.

Kimra wrote:

Lethal Interjection wrote:

Kimra wrote:Fruitarianism the real ethical choice.

That is almost angering me. That is so stupid. Ever so much worst than vegan.
Because by that logic, they should be able to eat eggs and milk (provided the animal is cared for in whatever way they deem fair). And ultimately they should be able to eat anything that's already dead (you know, provided its fresh).

Some people and religions take it to the extreme and will only eat the fruit that has fallen from the trees. They consider picking the fruit wrong.

That would still allow them to eat recently dead meat, provided it died naturally or whatever. Living off the scraps of the land, so to speak.

Lethal Interjection wrote:That would still allow them to eat recently dead meat, provided it died naturally or whatever. Living off the scraps of the land, so to speak.

This is true. But then again I never said these people were smart. Just that they existed.

Existing is tricky business.

Lethal Interjection wrote:

Kimra wrote:Fruitarianism the real ethical choice.

That is almost angering me. That is so stupid. Ever so much worst than vegan.
Because by that logic, they should be able to eat eggs and milk (provided the animal is cared for in whatever way they deem fair). And ultimately they should be able to eat anything that's already dead (you know, provided its fresh).

The Jains have an incredibly strict diet and are probably the inspiration for secular fruitarianism. They still eat dairy products (milk, yogurt, cheese, etc), although not eggs. Not eating the flesh of any animals is a religious ideology for them though. Previous to getting piped water supply, they even filtered their water through cloths to prevent drinking any animal life that may have been in the water.

While I don't personally agree with many 'ethical' diets like fruitarianism, I don't really care either as long as those people aren't somehow doing me harm. The diets that drive me crazy are things like the paleodiet or live-raw veganism. They still don't really bother me all that much. I don't really care how other people decide to voluntarily deprive themselves. I'm just annoyed by some of the incredibly unfounded or just plain idiotic health claims made by some of the adherents.

Kaharz wrote:

Lethal Interjection wrote:

Kimra wrote:Fruitarianism the real ethical choice.

That is almost angering me. That is so stupid. Ever so much worst than vegan.
Because by that logic, they should be able to eat eggs and milk (provided the animal is cared for in whatever way they deem fair). And ultimately they should be able to eat anything that's already dead (you know, provided its fresh).

The Jains have an incredibly strict diet and are probably the inspiration for secular fruitarianism. They still eat dairy products (milk, yogurt, cheese, etc), although not eggs. Not eating the flesh of any animals is a religious ideology for them though. Previous to getting piped water supply, they even filtered their water through cloths to prevent drinking any animal life that may have been in the water.

While I don't personally agree with many 'ethical' diets like fruitarianism, I don't really care either as long as those people aren't somehow doing me harm. The diets that drive me crazy are things like the paleodiet or live-raw veganism. They still don't really bother me all that much. I don't really care how other people decide to voluntarily deprive themselves. I'm just annoyed by some of the incredibly unfounded or just plain idiotic health claims made by some of the adherents.

I didn't really consider religious reasons. That wouldn't piss me off. And any dietary restriction people have is fine. It was just some of the logical inconsistencies that seem apparent in an 'ethical' fruitarianism.

noone wrote:

Peon wrote:How is becoming a vegetarian making an ethical choice? Plants are just as alive as animals.

Vegetarians make their choice based on sentience, or the capacity that animals have to 'experience' pain. Plants, on the other hand, are not sentient.

Not according to recent research.

Actually, ethical vegetarians make their decision based on ignorance of that research, much like you made that post based on ignorance of that research.

Not all vegetarians are ethical vegetarians. Some make their choice based on ignorance of nutritional research. Others based on ignorance about how farming affects the environment.

Inb4 that research turns out to be total bullshit.

GUTCHUCKER wrote:Inb4 that research turns out to be total bullshit.

Inb4 animal intelligence research turns out to be total bullshit.

I just love all the extreme bias that people have against plant intelligence research. Even if those biased against it actually ever read the research, they insist that it must be bullshit without even being able to point to any actual flaw in it.

It's a great way to spot people against whom you never want to argue because they will just never give up their bias, no matter what research and statistics you present to them.

Life is life.

Peon wrote:Life is life.

I respect none of it!

*chews on a baby leg*

Where is the research, anyway?

GUTCHUCKER wrote:Inb4 that research turns out to be total bullshit.

GUTCHUCKER wrote:Where is the research, anyway?

It's nice how you don't even have to see the research to know that it must be crap.

I'm not going to go track down the research this late at night. If you want to disprove it so badly, just look for it yourself. I mean, seriously? Are you really so lazy? I already did this several times because of bias-filled idiots that don't know how to use any sort of search engine insist that i provide them with a portion of the heaps of research. Heck, you'd probably be able to find some of the research through Google if you spent just a few minutes bothering with it.

I'm not going to bother with this anymore. You're clearly psychic to be able to discern the quality of the research without even seeing it, and I don't argue with psychics. They clearly know all.

ReasonablyDoubtful wrote:

GUTCHUCKER wrote:Inb4 that research turns out to be total bullshit.

GUTCHUCKER wrote:Where is the research, anyway?

It's nice how you don't even have to see the research to know that it must be crap.

I'm not going to go track down the research this late at night. If you want to disprove it so badly, just look for it yourself. I mean, seriously? Are you really so lazy? I already did this several times because of bias-filled idiots that don't know how to use any sort of search engine insist that i provide them with a portion of the heaps of research. Heck, you'd probably be able to find some of the research through Google if you spent just a few minutes bothering with it.

I'm not going to bother with this anymore. You're clearly psychic to be able to discern the quality of the research without even seeing it, and I don't argue with psychics. They clearly know all.

No, that's not what I asked, see I asked, where is the research?
Where is it? Where did you find it? Show it to me, I have no idea where it is. I tried google and found sweet fuck all. There were articles extrapolating from old research and people who thought that plants could 'extend energy' and feel deaths nearby. What are you reading? Why are you calling me a retard?

Edit: And inb4 is obviously a joke. Why umad?