[manu]

Yes in India, in the past, they had four castes and it wasnt by birth, but by qualities. The upper three didnt eat meat except for the Kshatriyas who could practice their fighting skills by hunting and could eat the meat. The fourth class, the sudras sometimes ate fish or birds. Lower than these were the melechas and chandalas, the meat eaters and dog eaters. No one ate the cow!

[max_power29]

NO! The state should not do anything except for commit suicide!

[happycrop]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SoothSayer', 'C')heck out the design of your teeth sometime.

Humans are OMNIVORES ... we are designed/evolved to eat vegetables ... and MEAT.

[Bas]

Considering you need ten times the amount of land for a calorie of meat vs vegetable, I don't think it's such a bad idea; A ban wouldn't work though, maybe a meat tax would be better; thinking about that I would actually be a big proponent of that.

[jato]

As long as there are humans, weapons and animals, we will always have meat!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.



...and Mr. Meaty!

[jato]

Okay, so we take away the meat and increase the world population to over 10 billion!?! What for!?! We will eventually wind up in the same overpopulation mess we are in right now!


Oh that’s right, we are going to limit reproduction as well! What a wonderful world it will be! Freedom was overrated anyway!

[/sarcasm]

[Ebyss]

Seriously, do you have any idea of the amount of animals shot each year just to maintain the grain harvest? A meat-free diet is not a dead-animal-free diet.

In the UK alone 5 million pigeons are shot each year to try and prevent them ruining the grain harvest. Imagine how many more you'd have to shoot if everyone went veggie and ate more grain and veg. This applies to organic farmers as well - I heard a story (yes, shock horror - anecdotal evidence!) about an organic potato farmer who would routinely shoot deer in the gut so they would limp off to the forest and die there instead of in his potato crop.

Not all land is suitable for growing soyabeans either - up here in the mountains we just can't grow grain (not on a large scale anyway, which is no bad thing, but another topic altogether, since we're talking about feeding the world here), but we grow sheep and some cattle very nicely indeed. Sure, we can all grow our own veg and battle with the rabbits, pigeons and deer on a personal level (by eating them, not wasting them as is currently done to keep veg and grain harvests up).

Deer and rabbits have never been so plentiful in the UK and Ireland because for some reason we don't eat them anymore - it's borderline taboo. So the government resorts to culling, and hunters get to kill a certain amount of animals per year. This has to be done to prevent these "pests" from ruining grain harvests. The real tragedy is not that animals are killed, but that they are wasted because of some idiotic notion that we're not supposed to eat "the cute ones".

While man can live very well without meat, I would suggest that unless he grows every last morsel of it himself, he cannot be sure that he is eating an animal-free/cruelty-free meal.

I'm not sure if the UN numbers about feeding the world with veganism take into account the numbers of pests killed each year in mainstream agriculture (and what to do with the cadavers), and I don't know whether they've said that they can feed the world using organic-type agriculture that supports wildlife, but if not then their numbers are somewhat skewed. Are their numbers based on the yields created by artificial pesticides, fertilisers and herbicides (which also contribute to GW)?

Now, I do agree that we shouldn't be eating so much meat, and we certainly shouldn't be farming cows in the intensive manner that happens today. It's so wrong it's not even funny. But banning meat will just cause a whole host of other problems for nature that it doesn't even bear thinking about. Large scale agriculture, both for meat and grain/veg, is the big problem here - and the only way that I can see to deal with this is to have a big die-off so the world *can* support the remaining population with organic/permaculture/small scale farming - which includes meat, but to a lesser extent than we're used to today.


As for whether vegetarianism should be mandatory? I'm a human being, and I will eat meat if I choose to. Seriously, why people should ever be denied fresh air, water or food that we are designed to eat (whether we choose to or not) is beyond me. To actually support an idea like this is sheer insanity. The problem isn't that there are too many animals, it's that there are too many people. Perhaps we should think about culling the latter before we discuss culling the former. How about making it mandatory?

[Newsseeker]

I am convinced that the energy we could save from eating a vegetarian or vegan diet is such that the harmful effects of peak oil could be pushed back several years. I wonder if the grain market would collapse, though. On the flip side, according to the Goebbels diaries the last leader with the power and will to mandate vegetarianism was old Uncle Adolf. Not quite sure if mandating is a good idea.

[killJOY]

Your typical grain-fed hyppy is a toothsome delight. Not too fatty, not too stringy.

Tastier than most grease-fed amerrrrikans.

[Ebyss]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') am convinced that the energy we could save from eating a vegetarian or vegan diet is such that the harmful effects of peak oil could be pushed back several years

[billg]

I say bring back the wolves! And make it a high crime to kill a wolf. The wolf is not so removed from our domesticated dog friend, so why not extend him the same protections we do in the "civilized" West.

With the wolf back in the neighborhood, we won't need to worry so much about defending our vegetable crops. The wolves will take care of the deer, woodchucks, raccoons, and rabbits if they become too numerous. No more need for fences, which often don't work so well. In fact, I say we should ban fences.

The wolves will be a deterrant to raising animals for food or even having pets (the wolves will be our new best friend). If a cattle farmer needs to worry about having half his herd culled by wolves (remember fences are banned), there won't be much of an incentive to be a cattle farmer.

Once all the animal farmers go out of business, we can plant those pastures with trees like fast-growing hybrid poplar or an invasive running variety of bamboo, which has many human uses. This will be a big boost to carbon sequestration, with all those pastures turning back for forest. We will be able to feed more humans on much less land with less energy expended on defending those lands.

It's time to let the wolves be wolves and the humans be humanes. That extra "e" was intended. Humans are top dog right now and we're doing a really poor job. Humans are way too intelligent and blood-thirsty to play the role of top dog.

hint..this is a crazy half-serious rant from a vegan who continues to be disgusted by human behavior on a daily basis.

[Ebyss]

As a full on carnivore who also happens to be an animal lover, I like your idea BillG. I'll just get me some of them enormous cattle dogs who fend off wolves and guard my small herd of meat-animals. The Maasai lived with lions, leopards, hyena right on their doorstep and still managed to be hunters/gatherers/shepherds - without the use of guns. The Native Americans did the same (bar the shepherding), but it was wolves and bears they had to share their home with. Not so anymore, but it once was.

But instead of growing just bamboo and fast growing poplars, we should be creating vast swathes of deciduous forest with an abundance of fruit and nut trees, tubers, veg, berries, filling it with native wildlife (we had wolves in Ireland, I say bring 'em back) and maintaining a strict code of ethics - only X amount of game to be removed per year (even with wolves there was still plenty of game to go around for the local human population). We should remove large scale monoculture and grain production from our food production system, since it is responsible for huge tracts of wildlife-habitat loss, and creates greenhouse gases when using fertilisers etc.

Of course, all of that will only work if we drastically reduce our population and learn not to be so damn greedy.

[cynicalheretic]

A little heads up for all of you!

You take my fucking steak away, and I am going to eat you!!!

Fuck this vegan nazi shit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[DavidFolks]

From another topic, "We don't need animal products"

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('DavidFolks', 'I')'m not going to go on about moral stances or opinion about what a human being needs to eat to be healthy.

I agree that human beings are designed with the capacity to derive nourishment from several sources, and do not necessarily need to eat meat.

If you look at historical Inuit culture though, you'll find that humans can survive with very little in the way of plant matter as well.

The point to this post is twofold:

1) We are lucky to live in a culture that allows us the choice of being vegan. While we can live on plant matter only, it is only a sustainable choice in areas where we can grow everything sufficient to our dietary needs. In some areas, growing seasons are not conducive to raising the plants in combinations we need for balanced nutrition, and we supplement with animal proteins and fatty acids.

2) Cost of energy to ship sufficient variety of plant nutrients to supply our dietary needs is where the peak oil effect comes into play. Local fruits, vegetables, nuts, and animal proteins from small, diverse farms are a sustainable way to feed communities. Shipping food around the world is not.

[mattduke]

Secret plans to encourage the nation to give up eating meat are being examined by the Government. A leaked e-mail expresses sympathy for the environmental benefits of a mass switch to a vegan diet - a strict form of vegetarianism which bans milk, dairy products and fish.

The change would need to be done "gently" because of a "risk of alienating the public", according to the document. The extreme policy is being examined on the basis it could make a major contribution to slowing climate change. Daily Mail

I am not the only person on this forum that's noticed many of the "global warming" related government policies have an uncanny similarity to policies some officials might believe would mitigate the effects of decreasingly available supplies of oil. Also, I am not the only person who believes decreasing supplies of energy will force most people to change their diets and consume less animal products due to their increasing expense. Amongst those who don't expect out and out starvation, that is a common belief. A story on the possible government regulation in this area is therefore interesting.

[Gazzatrone]

Slowing down climate change? Hmmm. One of the most petrol reliant industries, supporting a supposed aid to slowing down climate change? Doesn't burning petrol....oh well, good to know those Whitehall bods are on the ball.

[frankthetank]

Somehow raise the prices of meat products and you'll force a change. Its crazy how cheap meat calories are.

[mmasters]

Well vegans are less likely to rebel with any force that's for sure; protein brings out the warrior in us. A vegan populace is an easy one to control and or powerdown. They definitely wont stop feeding meat to the military though.

[Twilight]

Mid-century we will all be eating vegetarian burgers, alright. Just not quite the way they intended...