It's Almost Turkey Time. You Know What That Means?
It's time for my annual post entitled: "Oh no. Not in my mouth, you don't."
Test yourself. Can you watch this all the way through?
Are you still hungry for flesh and tumors and ulcers?
Vegans are thinner, healthier, cuter, tastier, and smell better than meat eaters. Don't make me prove it to you.
While you're out shopping for your Thanksgiving feast, consider picking up a few items for your local homeless shelter or soup kitchen.
I'm gonna go nibble on a carrot. Enjoy the clip, peeps.
posted by kate @ 9:22 AM
9 comments
9 Comments:
And abortion is OK?
Yeah, I've had people make this argument to me before. Here's how I look at it - I do not believe that a fetus, before it is viable, is the same as a baby. I also don't believe it's alive in the same way that we are alive or that living breathing animals are alive.
I do believe that abortion should be safe, legal, and unrestricted in the first trimester. I also believe some restrictions are appropriate after that, always to make an exception for the health of the mother.
I am also not one of those vegetarians who believe humans and animals are the same. We're not. Humans come first. And because we hold dominion over the animals, I believe we should act in a humane way.
That suffering and torturing shit is uncalled for and an abomination. No matter how you look at it.
Eat meat? Fine. But eat animals who don't have ulcers and tumors due to horrific conditions from awful people.
That's all I'm saying.
I am also not one of those vegetarians who believe humans and animals are the same. We're not. Humans come first. And because we hold dominion over the animals, I believe we should act in a humane way.
Totally agree with you there.
That suffering and torturing shit is uncalled for and an abomination.
Again, agreed. I don't know anyone who would condone those conditions.
I do not believe that a fetus, before it is viable, is the same as a baby. I also don't believe it's alive in the same way that we are alive or that living breathing animals are alive.
That I don't get. Why is an unborn human(you can't be pregnant unless a human is conceived) not considered enough alive just because it cannot live outside the mother's womb. With science, there will come a time when humans don't need a mother to survive and thus be viable from the beginning. Will you change your mind if/when that happens?
That's all I'm saying.
So I shouldn't expect a response.
Whatever.
I'm enjoying a chemically enhanced turkey AND squash Rockafeller for Thanksgiving. And I'll be washing it down with more wine than is strictly necessary and a few martinis that I mix and down before the family actually arrives.
I may flirt with vegetarianism other days of the year, but no matter how hard I try, I cannot divorce "Turkey" from "America".
And please, that clip's no worse than most gay porn I...er...SOME homosexuals indulge in.
If you flirt with vegetarianism like you flirt with men, I'm guessing FAIL.
John boy, can you explain why God kills so many babies by causing women to miscarry?
Then please explain why he kills the embryos that don't implant in the uterine wall. That's about 30% of fertilized people God murders daily, according to your theory.
Nutritional problems, variations in body chemistry, a stray herb, stress, disease, less than optimal physical environment, genetics, bad timing.
All these are reasons the Lord God Yahweh or whatever you want to call him, uses to avoid the "birth of a child" not the "transition of haploid to diploid zygote."
Decisions about the moral dilemma of abortion belong to women, doctors, and science. Demagogues, or clergy, who exploit the confusion involved in a complex issue to instill fear and gain power, should be mocked. I value and appreciate the responsible behavior that the church intends to cultivate with their position on this, but the church is like the Original Nintendo Game system, it's fun to know where we began, but the resolution is horrible.
There are better ways of keeping people from being careless with life (AIDS, thanks Jesus!), but it's not a task either science or religion can address alone.
"God kills so many babies by causing women to miscarry?"
Mmm, fine, but who the hell said anything about God? I mean, are YOU going to explain why God allows so many people to die in car crashes everyday and why the decision to drive should be left up to the driver and car companies with government staying the hell out or why God allows people to die of secondary infections in hospitals or any of another number of shitty things that happen to folks that suddenly we're laying at the foot of God.
The point is, Keith, that you've invoked God in an assumption that either Kate or John base their opinions in religion. Perhaps they do, however neither Kate nor John have thus far explicitly stated their points in such terms. In fact, they've both been quite clear not to and seemingly have come to their conclusions not because of some ersatz divinity, but because of simple human compassion. Their conclusions are different, which makes their discussion interesting, while the fiating in and assumption of religious whackery is an utterly common, boring strawman.
And your Nintendo analogy...pfft, atrocious. One might as well say that all we're doing now is just what we were doing then: moving pixels about on the screen. Or how about, the resolution may improve, but the stories stay the same. Seriously, dude, control your analogy or it'll control you.
Thanks for saving me (the keystrokes), Quaker.
Again, opposition to abortion without qualification requires that one ignore science and take it on FAITH that the "transition of haploid to diploid zygote" creates a person worthy of compassion. Quakerdude, you can fault my silly analogy, but you still can't answer the questions I presented. Why do you want a woman to give up control over what her own body already controls?
Science can only address viability and possibility, you can't measure when the soul arrives. Claiming you know when it does makes you a lair. Period.
Post a Comment
<< Home