Any Vegetarians on This Board?

The Ween said:

Vegans can still use roids.

Click to expand...

Yes but even if he did, so did everyone else. Therefore, it was an even competition. However, where do the steroids come from? Are they animal or plant based? If they are animal based, it wasn't vegan, and this guy was and is committed to veganism and has been working out and staying muscular all these years, even at 78. This guy is in Jack LaLanne territory.

"People who self-righteously take issue with what others put in their own mouths - be it food or johnsons or whatever - are pretty lame."

That wasn't the point of what I posted, nor was it a point that anyone else made here. Where are you getting that from? Don't change the subject.
This is about the fact that Jim Morris was able to win Mr. America at 37 as a vegan and he never got the credit for it. A person can be a bodybuilder on a vegan diet. A person can be very strong on a vegan diet, dispelling the myth about all vegans being weak.

Why Didn't he get credit for it all those years ago? They claimed it was impossible for anyone to be 30 points above everyone else in the competition. Maybe 5, but not 30. They then dismissed him entirely, and unfairly.
Was it because the meat eaters didn't want to make it known that vegans could be strong? Were they intimidated? If he got credit, it would have radically changed public perception about veganism in the athletic community and all over the world forever.

My post was about acknowledging what can be done and why he didn't get credit for what he did.

It's important.
It has nothing to do with self righteousness, Mr. red herring.

Dracula said:

Seems like whenever you try to debate this issue, the one standing on the side of animals will always come off as self-righteous to the one who eats animals no matter how he/she goes about it..

Click to expand...

I wonder if anti slavery advocates in the 1700s-1800s were viewed as self righteous?


Most people in this world are AMORAL, so they view anyone who strives after righteousness as being self-righteous, because most people are only interested in fitting in and survival, with no interest in principles or altruism, or idealism, or even peak performance.
As an aside, I wonder if people view professional athletes or anyone athletic as self righteous, since most people don't exercise at all?

They might feel, I don't exercise, who do you think you are, getting out and exercising?


At any rate, my new post as about what can be done on a vegan diet, lending further credence to the fact that one doesn't need to eat animal products to be strong, one of the main arguments for eating animal products.
I never heard of him before, and thought his story should be told.

Jim Morris.
It's fair to say he lost interest in competing after he didn't get credit for winning Mr. America. Without credit, what's the point in competing? Nevertheless, he's still going strong at 78. His physique is incredible.

"People who self-righteously take issue with what others put in their own mouths - be it food or johnsons or whatever - are pretty lame."


By the way, lame means
1.
crippled or physically disabled, especially in the foot or leg so as to limp or walk with difficulty.
2.
impaired or disabled through defect or injury: a lame arm.
3.
weak; inadequate; unsatisfactory; clumsy: a lame excuse.

Someone doesn't understand what lame means.
The word you are looking for is concerned or intolerant.
A person could take issue with something someone else puts in their mouth because they are concerned for their well being , because they have empathy, perhaps something someone lacks, and calls the concerned person lame.

A person could take issue with something someone else puts in their mouth because they are intolerant for some reason and is not motivated by concern or empathy for others.



Lame has to do with the inability to act or change. "A lame excuse"
People who rationalize any unhealthy behavior is lame.
People who rationalize complacency and refusal to change when change is warranted or at least to try something that would be good for them is lame.
People who can't bring themselves to stop smoking or doing drugs or binge drinking are lame.
People who can't stop themselves from eating junk food are lame.




People who can get themselves to eat healthy, exercise and make changes for the better are of course the opposite of lame. They are obviously empowered.

Blackthornone said:

I wonder if anti slavery advocates in the 1700s-1800s were viewed as self righteous?

Click to expand...

If anyone says that something you've been raised to do is immoral, of course they're going to take issue with it and view those persons as self-righteous, no matter if they're right or wrong.

Blackthornone said:

People who can get themselves to eat healthy, exercise and make changes for the better are of course the opposite of lame. They are obviously empowered.

Click to expand...

I completely agree with your posts, but there are vegans who go about it in a way that only hurts the movement. Then the non-vegans will hate everything about veganism because of that one person. It's important to put ourselves in their shoes and wonder, how would we want the case for veganism delivered to us if we ate animals? Take PETA for an example. They've completely f-ed up the view of animal rights and vegetarianism in the US and internationally too thanks to media and internet. But I think even if you went about it the most respectful way without attacking someone, they'd still view you as self-righteous. Just saying "I don't eat meat" can make people pissed off.

The Reverend just berated me for changing the subject, lm *****king ao.

we have talked about this before but yeah I will never understand why people and celebrities will ever join peta

The Ween said:

I don't care either way if people eat meat or don't. We are omnivores so we can eat both or either.

PETA is a whole nother thing. They are whacked out *******s who don't think people should even own pets and have been killing rescued dogs and cats for years. NEVER call PETA for rescues. The animal will just be killed. They think a pet is better off dead than "being owned by a human".

Sick SOBS.

Sorry for the rant.

Click to expand...

PETA has some problems to be sure.

Gary Yourofsky talks about problems with PETA here. He is a vegan who isn't a member of PETA
PETA thinks education isn't important.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=HekpfSTxO-E#t=1345

Here is the lecture he did before the Q and A . It's an excellent lecture on veganism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UROxRLbVils

Here is an excellent interview he gave with an ignorant reporter who constantly tried to provoke him. He came out on top.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYP1GGdRMYo

The Ween said:

PETA is a whole nother thing. They are whacked out *******s who don't think people should even own pets and have been killing rescued dogs and cats for years. NEVER call PETA for rescues. The animal will just be killed. They think a pet is better off dead than "being owned by a human".

Sick SOBS.

Sorry for the rant.

Click to expand...

You don't have to apologize, you're right. It's horrible what they do. Perhaps some of the rescues are euthanized because they're suffering and can't recover, but all of them? PETA claim they kill some of those rescues because there's no one to take care of them. With all that money PETA has, shouldn't they be able to open up some large pet home facilities or something and hire people to take care of them? I'd donate money and support something like that.

But PETA isn't the only one to blame for this. I wish people needed some kind of a license to own pets. Incompetent owners are the number one reason why pets suffer or become homeless (or end up at PETA). You could also adopt rather than pay those who breed animals for sale, there's a big problem with that industry as well. There are so many animals in need of a home and people would rather pay a breeder instead. I'm going to adopt an animal soon as I move out (one family member is allergic to fur). Wish I could adopt them all and give them a good life. I don't feel this way only for dogs and cats, but all animals that suffer by the hands of humans.

crows said:

we have talked about this before but yeah I will never understand why people and celebrities will ever join peta

Click to expand...

Unaware of everything PETA does and perhaps they only want to get a positive message out there?

Blackthornone said:

Gary Yourofsky talks about problems with PETA here. He is a vegan who isn't a member of PETA

Click to expand...

Gary is the man. He's one of the reasons why I went vegan. He's speeches really made me open up my eyes.

Blackthornone said:

"People who self-righteously take issue with what others put in their own mouths - be it food or johnsons or whatever - are pretty lame."

That wasn't the point of what I posted, nor was it a point that anyone else made here. Where are you getting that from? Don't change the subject.
This is about the fact that Jim Morris was able to win Mr. America at 37 as a vegan and he never got the credit for it. A person can be a bodybuilder on a vegan diet. A person can be very strong on a vegan diet, dispelling the myth about all vegans being weak.

Why Didn't he get credit for it all those years ago? They claimed it was impossible for anyone to be 30 points above everyone else in the competition. Maybe 5, but not 30. They then dismissed him entirely, and unfairly.
Was it because the meat eaters didn't want to make it known that vegans could be strong? Were they intimidated? If he got credit, it would have radically changed public perception about veganism in the athletic community and all over the world forever.

My post was about acknowledging what can be done and why he didn't get credit for what he did.

It's important.
It has nothing to do with self righteousness, Mr. red herring.

Click to expand...

im starting to see it now.

this is why cain bashed abel's brais out.

cain sez "...effin vegan!"

fosing said:

im starting to see it now.

this is why cain bashed abel's brais out.

cain sez "...effin vegan!"

Click to expand...

...although, given that Abel's offering was a slaughtered animal and Cain's was a basket of veggies, it's more likely that claims of being an "effin' vegan" came from Abel.

Don't mess wid da veganz yo!

fosing said:

im starting to see it now.

this is why cain bashed abel's brais out.

cain sez "...effin vegan!"

Click to expand...

He bashed his brains out because he was evil. Only an evil person would use violence for anything but self defense. That same evil led him to bash animals brains in so he could eat them. I wonder if he ate him too?

Lejuan said:

...although, given that Abel's offering was a slaughtered animal and Cain's was a basket of veggies, it's more likely that claims of being an "effin' vegan" came from Abel.

Don't mess wid da veganz yo!

Click to expand...

should've been "effin vegan rules!"

dun mezz wid bad azz effin vegan, yo. we loco. we mash yer brains bad like mashed potatoes.<-----the vegans edited this one out. i knows eet.

apparently biblegod found cain's ways....disturbing.

Cain's heart just wasn't in his sacrifice, and that's why it was rejected by God. And then he opted to kill Abel out of jealousy.

I'm also sure that being a possible vegan also had something to do with why he bludgeoned his kid bro to death. Dem vegans are a fanatical lot .

Cain may have been the first PETA activist. He saw how Abel was mulesing the sheep to protect against flystrike and became enraged, demanding that his brother find a better way before burning all the woollen sweaters that Abel had knitted as gifts for his parents.

Make no mistake, beefcake Cain was one angry mofo. Roids and a vegan diet, I tellya - I'm surprised he stopped at bludgeoning Abel and didn't end all humanity right there.

Eating meat is not immoral. Perhaps this is why carnivores see vegans as self-righteous. I have yet to meet one that justifies their choice of diet in amoral terms.

devilof76 said:

Eating meat is not immoral. Perhaps this is why carnivores see vegans as self-righteous. I have yet to meet one that justifies their choice of diet in amoral terms.

Click to expand...

Any form of killing of violence that isn't needed for self defense or survival is evil, regardless of what it is.
Having to kill someone whether human or animal that attacks you is not immoral. Killing a human or animal when you don't need to , especially for pleasure because you want to eat them when you don't need to IS.

If you have no other source of food in the wild and must eat an animal to survive, that is different. That is a grey area. If you can get to someplace where you can get to a plant food source before you starve, then killing the animal is immoral. If you can't, it is not so immoral.


Does striving after righteousness necessarily make oneself SELF righteous?


"right·eous
[rahy-chuhs] Show IPA
adjective
1.
characterized by uprightness or morality: a righteous observance of the law.
2.
morally right or justifiable: righteous indignation.
3.
acting in an upright, moral way; virtuous: a righteous and godly person. "

"
self-right·eous
[self-rahy-chuhs, self-] Show IPA
adjective
confident of one's own righteousness, especially when smugly moralistic and intolerant of the opinions and behavior of others."

Is is fair to say, according to the idea that all vegans are self righteous, that anyone who has no interest in being righteous at all will always see someone who tries to do the righteous thing as being self-righteous?

Couldn't it also be said that meat eaters are self righteous because they believe themselves to be so much better than the animals they kill which is their justification for eating animal products?

Couldn't it be said that meat eaters are self righteous when they believe they are better than vegans and dismiss vegans as inferior and their thus overall life philosophy as invalid?

Couldn't it be said that meat eaters who understand why a meat eater would bash a vegan's brains out is extremely self righteous and intolerant?



Who is the more intolerant of others, the vegan who respects the lives of other beings, or the meat eater with no regard for the lives of other beings like animals and eats them?

Is intolerance always a bad thing?
Is it wrong to be intolerant of rape and rapists?
Is it wrong to believe oneself morally superior to a rapist?

Is it wrong to believe that rapists, murders and thieves are morally inferior to non rapists non murderers and non thieves?

devilof76 said:

Eating meat is not immoral.

Click to expand...

If it's done out of vital necessity. I would eat meat if it was a question of survival. But in this day and age, enslaving, torturing and executing billions of animals and treating them like **** is totally unnecessary and cruel. When we can choose to be kind to them, why do them harm? It makes no sense.

Perhaps this is why carnivores see vegans as self-righteous.

Click to expand...

Carnivores? Do you mean people who eat meat? I'm just saying, humans aren't carnivores.