posted 06-09-99 08:31 PM ET            

You can eat dirt, but that doesn't mean you should.

posted 06-09-99 09:17 PM ET            

I'm a picky omnivore I'll eat just about anything, so long as I don't have to cook it. Anyone else here hoping someone comes up with a nutritious meal that's about the consistency of a candy bar and comes is gross?

As for vegetarians/vegans, I don't care what you do. I agree with those that do it for taste (if it tastes yucky to you, why eat it?) and most of those who do it for health reasons (if they've got specific health reasons I agree, if it's just health in general I don't), but not those that do it for moral reasons (Bishop... just never agree with you, do I? :P) since plants are alive too, what gives cute little fuzzy animals more right to live than those poor defenseles plants who never harmed anyone?

posted 06-09-99 11:26 PM ET            

Me? I eat as much meat as I can hmmm meat.

posted 06-11-99 01:00 PM ET            

Also, feeding the world population on vegetarianism alone? I doubt it. Although vegetables are more efficient in the respect of being a primary source of energy from sunlight (other animals eat this - loses energy in inefficiency), we cannot digest the vast amounts of energy in plants stored as cellulose. Cattle, for example, can. This is why it is sensible to eat animals. Cattle have digestive pathways we do not possess.

posted 06-11-99 02:02 PM ET            

I, on the other hand, tie the risk of not having enough food for the world directly to people's inability to stop breeding like rabbits even in the face of starvation-level poverty. That's another topic altogether.

By the way, although I am not a vegetarian, I typically eat far less meat than the average American. I eat more in the winter, probably about average then, but otherwise less (and especially in the summer when I don't feel like cooking). I get a largish percentage of my proteins from dairy products. I've found I feel better when I keep my meat intake lower (but not if I were to give it up altogether)... quite possibly because some of the gap is filled with more vegetables and fruits and grains, all things a lot of people in this country are short on on a day-to-day basis. So the vegetarianism-for-health thing also has some merit, although I don't advocate giving up meat -- though most people could probably stand to start eating smaller servings of it.

posted 06-11-99 02:25 PM ET         

As Always I remain,

posted 06-11-99 02:26 PM ET            

The idea of eating animals is harder for some people, like myself. I associate the idea of eating a cow or a pig or whatever with eating my pet cat. I know that every living animal has a unique personality and right to live, just like my cat. Realizing this, I cannot bring myself to eat animals, although I know that the meat I don't eat won't do those slaughtered animals any good. Plants, however, are nothing like my cat. I have no pet plants. It's very hard for me to imagine a plant as having feelings or experiencing pain. So, in truth, I am a hypocrite, but as I am harming no people by being a vegetarian, there is nothing wrong with that. I am simply limiting my consumption of living things, and by doing so I'm playing favorites- animals over plants.

Now, very few people would die if they were deprived of meat. For those of you who say you couldn't survive without it, be serious; your body does not rely on meat to live. In fact, the protein which your body gains from eating meat is insignifigant compared to the negative effects meat has on your body, which becomes far more susceptible to heart attacks. Protein is also available from many other sources, so meat is not really necessary these days, although it may have been in the past.

Some vegetarians are only such because of the way the meat industry treats its products, the animals themselves. The butchery that goes on would horrify many people when they imagine it being done to humans, or perhaps their pets. But not these animals. Why? Well, i have my own theory on that. People have a basic instinct to preserve their species. Cows and pigs, however, people feel little remorse for. Our species is not around to keeps pigs safe. We're interested in our own longevity. But the truth is, what slaughterhouses do is horrible when it's directed at any species.

posted 06-14-99 06:32 PM ET         

As always,I remain,

posted 06-14-99 07:29 PM ET         

Remaining, as always

posted 06-14-99 07:58 PM ET         

Remaining, A bit more serious this time,

posted 06-15-99 04:08 PM ET            

Actually, protein is by far not the number one nutrient that meat supplies, although it is a nice, easy way of getting some... and people who want to give up meat altogether had best make sure they make up for missing one of the B vitamins (I do not off-hand remember which one but it is solely found in meat sources... possibly synthetically available these days, though) and watch their amino acids and make sure they make up for the fat intake (no fat makes it real hard to absorb vitamins A, D, K and E...)

So while it may be true that meat is not strictly speaking necessary, it is true that it's really easy to short yourself on certain nutrients by giving it up. You trade one potential health problem for another. And in both cases, it is only a potential; that increased heart attack risk is not a function of muscle tissue but of fatty tissue, and there are plenty of people who stick to low-fat meats; likewise, some vegans take supplements from synthetic sources or make up for trace lacks by upping things with similar nutrient functions.

"So is vegetarian food easier to prepare?"

Overall? No. The dishes have about the same range of complexity as meat-containing dishes. About the only thing I can think of off-hand that possibly counts as 'easier' is that there are more things you can do with uncooked veggies than with uncooked meat.

On the other hand, I know no one who became a vegetarian for ease-of-cooking reasons.

"Why did God make so many animals if we weren't supposed to eat them?"

Presupposing the existence of God, this is still a rather silly question. There are more rocks than animals, and we don't eat those.

"Would it change anybody's opinion or feelings on the subject knowing that Hitler was a vegetarian?"

If it weren't for the fact this isn't Usenet, I'd bring up Godwin's law...

But for the record, no. Someone with a bad philosophy is not someone whose every philosophy/belief is bad.